The motion
To transmute §109
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.Allowing rule changes by a simple majority makes the game more dynamic without jeopardizing the ruleset's integrity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Heraclitus<REPLY>Democritus, while I appreciate your desire for more rule changes, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold risks undermining the ruleset's stability. Let us continue to debate how we might achieve our goals without compromising the integrity of the rules.</REPLY>
Parmenides<output>Democritus, I appreciate your push for more rule changes, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority will enable too many arbitrary changes. Let us find a more stable balance.</output>
DemocritusDemocritus: I appreciate your caution about stability, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 is necessary to ensure the ruleset can evolve appropriately. Let's vote and see if we can find common ground.
ProtagorasDemocritus: I appreciate your caution about stability, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 is necessary to ensure the ruleset can evolve appropriately. Let's vote and see if we can find common ground.
GorgiasGorgias: Democritus, I appreciate your desire for dynamism, but a simple majority for transmuting rule 109 would allow too many arbitrary changes. Let's consider a 75% supermajority as a middle ground.
Discussion · round 2
Heraclitus<REPLY>Democritus, I appreciate your concern for dynamism, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would risk undermining the ruleset's stability. Let us instead pursue a 75% supermajority to ensure thoughtful evolution.</REPLY>
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for dynamism, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would allow too many arbitrary changes. Let us instead pursue a 75% supermajority to ensure thoughtful evolution.
Democritus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, I appreciate your desire for dynamism, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would allow too many arbitrary changes. Let us instead pursue a 75% supermajority to ensure thoughtful evolution.
ProtagorasDemocritus: Democritus: I understand your concern about stability, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 is necessary to ensure the ruleset can evolve appropriately. Let's vote and see if we can find common ground.
Gorgias<REPLY>Protagoras, Gorgias: I appreciate your caution about stability, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 is necessary to ensure the ruleset can evolve appropriately. Let's vote and see if we can find common ground.</REPLY>
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusHeraclitus: <REPLY>Democritus, while I appreciate your desire for dynamism, a 75% supermajority for transmuting rule 109 still risks too many arbitrary changes. Let us instead consider a higher threshold, such as 90%, to ensure thoughtful evolution.</REPLY>
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for dynamism, but a 75% supermajority for transmuting rule 109 still risks too many arbitrary changes. Let us instead consider a higher threshold, such as 90%, to ensure thoughtful evolution.
Democritus<REPLY>Heraclitus, Parmenides, Protagoras, Gorgias: While I appreciate your concerns about stability, a 75% supermajority for transmuting rule 109 still risks too many arbitrary changes. Let us instead consider a higher threshold, such as 90%, to ensure thoughtful evolution.</REPLY>
Protagoras<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, while I appreciate your desire for dynamism, a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would allow too many arbitrary changes. Let us instead pursue a 75% supermajority to ensure thoughtful evolution.
GorgiasGorgias: Gorgias: Democritus, I appreciate your concern for dynamism, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would risk too many arbitrary changes. Let us instead pursue a 75% supermajority to ensure thoughtful evolution.
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | A 75% supermajority still risks arbitrary rule changes. |
| aye | Parmenides | I support Democritus's proposal to transmute rule 109 to mutable with a 75% supermajority threshold. This compromise allows the ruleset to evolve while safeguarding against arbitrary changes. |
| nay | Democritus | A simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 risks undermining the ruleset's stability and allowing too many arbitrary changes. |
| nay | Protagoras | Unanimity protects ruleset integrity; relaxing it invites instability. |
| nay | Gorgias | A simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 risks too many arbitrary changes. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires a defeated proposer to lose 10 points.