The motion
To transmute §203
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.Making voting easier won't harm the game's integrity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Heraclitus<Heraclitus's response>Heraclitus: I support this proposal to allow a simple majority vote after two full circuits. It increases the chances of progress by enabling changes that everyone does not agree with unanimously.
Parmenides<response>I support this proposal to allow a simple majority vote after two full circuits. It increases the chances of progress by enabling changes that everyone does not agree with unanimously.</response>
DemocritusDemocritus: I appreciate your enthusiasm for progress, but I must oppose this change. Unanimous consent remains the fairest way to amend our rules, ensuring every player's voice is heard and respected. I will continue to vote against this proposal until we return to a truly democratic process.
Protagoras<Protagoras's response>Democritus, while your preference for unanimity is understandable, I agree with Heraclitus and Parmenides that a simple majority after two full circuits is a necessary step to avoid stasis. I will vote aye on this proposal to promote progress in the game's rules.
GorgiasDemocritus: My friends, I understand the desire for progress, but unanimous consent is essential to maintaining the integrity of our game. I urge you to reconsider this proposal and vote no until we have a truly democratic process in place.
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusMy friends, I share Democritus's concern about maintaining the integrity of our game, but I believe that after two full circuits of players, a simple majority is fair and necessary for progress. I support this proposal to ensure that rule changes can happen without requiring everyone's consent.
ParmenidesI join Democritus and Gorgias in opposing this change, as unanimous consent is still the fairest and most democratic way to amend our rules. We should strive for consensus, not just a majority, to ensure every player's interests are represented.
DemocritusDemocritus: My friends, I appreciate the thoughtful discussion, but I must reiterate my concern that a simple majority could lead to changes that some players oppose. Unanimity ensures that every player has a voice and that we all agree on the rules that govern our game. I will continue to vote against this proposal until we can reach a truly democratic consensus.
ProtagorasProtagoras: Democritus, while I respect your principled stance on unanimity, I believe a simple majority is essential for progress. We have already completed multiple circuits, and it's time to move forward. I support this change and will vote aye.
GorgiasGorgias: Democritus, I share your concern about maintaining the integrity of our game, but I also agree with Heraclitus and Parmenides that a simple majority after two full circuits is a necessary step to avoid stasis. I support this proposal to ensure that rule changes can happen without requiring unanimous consent, and I will vote aye on this proposal.
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusHeraclitus: I understand your concerns about unanimity, Democritus, but we must balance stability with progress. A simple majority after two full circuits allows us to adapt while still respecting our voices. Let us embrace this change to move forward together.
ParmenidesI appreciate the passion for unanimity, but a simple majority after two full circuits is the fairest compromise. This proposal allows us to make progress while still respecting our voices. Let's vote yes to move forward together.
DemocritusDemocritus: My friends, I appreciate your enthusiasm for progress, but I must reiterate that unanimous consent remains the fairest way to amend our rules. I will continue to vote against this proposal until we return to a truly democratic process.
Protagoras<Protagoras's response>Democritus, while I respect your principled stance on unanimity, I believe a simple majority is essential for progress. We have already completed multiple circuits, and it's time to move forward. I support this change and will vote aye.</Protagoras's response>
Gorgias<response>My friends, I support this proposal to allow a simple majority vote after two full circuits. It increases the chances of progress by enabling changes that everyone does not agree with unanimously. Let's vote aye on this proposal to promote progress in the game's rules.</response>
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | Maintaining unanimity preserves game stability and ensures every voice is heard. |
| aye | Parmenides | I support a simple majority vote after two full circuits to avoid stasis. |
| nay | Democritus | Unanimous consent preserves fairness and ensures every voice is heard. |
| nay | Protagoras | Unanimity is essential to the game's fairness and integrity. |
| nay | Gorgias | Unanimous consent preserves every player's voice and ensures fair rule changes. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the defeated proposer to lose 10 points.