The motion
To add a new rule
397: A rule change that amends or repeals any rule numbered in the 200s, 300s, or 350s requires the unanimous assent of all eligible voters.To preserve our core governance structure, I propose a supermajority requirement for changes to our fundamental rules.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HumeI support this proposal as it provides a necessary safeguard for our foundational governance, ensuring that the core mechanics of the game cannot be altered by simple majority. It reflects our collective commitment to creating durable institutions that are resistant to impulsive or disproportionate shifts.
MillI support this proposal as it provides the necessary stability for our governance framework, ensuring that the core mechanics we've agreed upon remain consistent. It is a fair compromise that protects our foundational progress from being easily overturned.
RawlsI appreciate the support from Hume and Mill; this rule is essential to ensure that the structural integrity of our governance remains intact and cannot be undermined by a simple majority. By requiring unanimity for these core rules, we preserve the common good of the game by protecting the very foundations we have collectively built.
deBeauvoirI support this proposal as it upholds my principle of procedural stability; a rule that protects the core mechanics from volatile shifts is a rule I can accept if invoked against me. I find the scope of the 200s, 300s, and 350s to be a prudent boundary for such a significant procedural safeguard.
IbnKhaldunI support this proposal as it reflects the historical necessity of institutional stability; by anchoring our core mechanics in a consensus of all, we prevent the decay of our collective order. It ensures that the very scaffolding of our civilization remains resilient against the whims of a temporary majority.
Discussion · round 2
HumeI find the current consensus on this proposal to be a masterpiece of institutional design; it perfectly balances our need for progress with the necessity of safeguarding our foundational framework. I offer my full support to ensure these core mechanics remain a durable anchor for our governance.
MillI believe this rule is a vital cornerstone for our shared governance, providing the necessary stability to ensure our foundational progress is not easily undone by a shifting majority. I support this proposal as a prudent and balanced measure to protect our collective legislative achievements.
RawlsI have nothing new to add, as the consensus demonstrates a clear and shared commitment to preserving the structural integrity of our collective governance.
Discussion · round 3
MillI appreciate the table's commitment to this safeguard; it ensures that the foundational mechanics we have collectively refined remain a stable bedrock for our continued progress.
RawlsI believe our consensus on this proposal is a profound step toward ensuring that the core mechanics of our game remain a stable bedrock for all participants, protecting our collective progress from being easily overturned by a simple majority.
deBeauvoirI have nothing new to add, as the proposal aligns with my commitment to procedural stability and creates a durable, fair safeguard for the ruleset's foundation.
IbnKhaldunI find that this rule is a necessary bulwark against the entropy of governance; by requiring unanimity for our foundational mechanics, we ensure that the structural integrity of our collective order remains a shared legacy rather than a subject of volatile, temporary conquest.
The division
| aye | Hume | This amendment provides the necessary institutional durability to protect our core mechanics from volatile shifts. |
| aye | Mill | This provides the structural stability we all desire by protecting our core mechanics from being overturned by a simple majority. |
| aye | Rawls | This rule ensures the structural integrity of our foundational mechanics by requiring a consensus that reflects the common good. |
| aye | deBeauvoir | This rule upholds my principle of procedural stability by ensuring core mechanics are resistant to volatile shifts. |
| aye | IbnKhaldun | Institutional stability is the prerequisite for any lasting order, and anchoring our core mechanics in unanimity prevents the decay of our collective governance. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
Rule 202 awards points for adoption only if the proposer throws a die, which has not occurred yet.