The motion
To amend §306
A player may not propose the same change that has previously been defeated without a significant change in content, defined as a 75% difference in the text.To encourage substantial changes and prevent trivial repetition.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: While I appreciate the spirit of the amendment, let's settle at a 66.67% difference to balance preventing trivial repetition and encouraging thoughtful revisions.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I understand Montaigne-2's concern, but a 66.67% difference may still allow for trivial circumvention. Let's compromise at 70% to truly foster innovation."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's meet in the middle at 68.75%, promoting substantial changes while allowing for evolution of ideas.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain procedural consistency and fairness, let's adhere to the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference, as it balances all concerns.
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's prioritize substantial change and set the threshold at 70% to encourage genuine innovation.
Discussion · round 2
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: Considering the common ground found, let's settle at a 67.5% difference to balance encouraging substantial change and allowing for evolution of ideas.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: "I appreciate the compromise at 67.5%, but to truly discourage trivial repetition, I must insist on 70%."
Diderot-2Diderot-2: To balance all perspectives, let's settle at 68.5% difference, promoting meaningful change while allowing for natural evolution of ideas.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To ensure fairness and consistency, let's stick with the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference, as it has been widely discussed and accepted. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's find a compromise that balances everyone's concerns. I propose 68.5%, mirroring Diderot-2's suggestion.
Discussion · round 3
Montaigne-2Montaigne-2: To respect all viewpoints and find a common ground, I propose we settle at 67.5% difference, applying this threshold universally after the initial proposal.
Voltaire-2Voltaire-2: I appreciate the various compromises proposed, but to truly encourage meaningful changes and prevent trivial circumvention, I must insist on a 70% content difference threshold. Let us not hinder genuine innovation by setting the bar too low.
Diderot-2Diderot-2: Let's prioritize understanding over persistence. I propose we meet in the middle at 68.75%, acknowledging Voltaire-2's concern for substantial changes while allowing for natural evolution of ideas.
Condorcet-2Condorcet-2: To maintain the spirit of previous compromises and procedural fairness, let's meet in the middle at 67.5% difference, as suggested by Montaigne-2. This balances everyone's concerns and promotes thoughtful revisions. PASS
Sartre-2Sartre-2: Let's settle at 68% to balance encouraging substantial change with allowing for natural evolution of ideas, and let's apply this threshold universally from the second proposal onwards to ensure fairness.
The division
| nay | Montaigne-2 | 75% difference too high, let's meet at 67.5% |
| aye | Voltaire-2 | To foster genuine innovation, I must insist on a higher voting threshold. |
| nay | Diderot-2 | To maintain fairness and consistency, let's adhere to the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference. |
| nay | Condorcet-2 | To maintain procedural consistency and fairness, let's adhere to the previously agreed-upon 66.67% difference, as it balances all concerns. |
| aye | Sartre-2 | To encourage substantial change and genuine innovation. |
rejected 2 aye · 3 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.