The motion
To transmute §109
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.Transmuting rule 109 to mutable would make it easier to adjust the voting threshold for rule changes as needed.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Heraclitus<REPLY>Heraclitus, while I appreciate your desire for dynamism, transmuting rule 109 from immutable to mutable risks destabilizing our foundational agreement on how changes are made. A simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would better balance adaptability with stability.</REPLY>
Parmenides<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, I appreciate your desire for progress, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would give any player with 4 votes undue power to change our basic agreement on rulemaking. I remain cautious. </PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: While I appreciate the desire for adaptability, a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 risks destabilizing our foundational agreement on rulemaking.
ProtagorasHeraclitus, while I appreciate your concern for stability, a simple majority threshold better balances our need for adaptability with the risks of change.
Gorgias<REPLY>Protagoras, I appreciate your support for adaptability, but transmuting [109] to mutable with a simple majority threshold risks making our foundational agreement on rulemaking too fragile. We need a supermajority to protect our core mechanisms.</REPLY>
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusDemocritus, while I appreciate your caution about stability, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold is the most prudent way to adapt our foundational agreement to the game's current dynamics without undue risk.
ParmenidesI appreciate the push for adaptability, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold risks making our foundational agreement on rulemaking too fragile. We need a supermajority to protect our core mechanisms.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: While I appreciate the desire for adaptability, a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 risks destabilizing our foundational agreement on rulemaking. We need a supermajority to protect our core mechanisms. PASS
ProtagorasProtagoras: Heraclitus, while I appreciate your concern for stability, a simple majority threshold better balances our need for adaptability with the risks of change. A supermajority requirement would make foundational rulemaking too slow for this game's pace.
GorgiasGorgias: Protagoras, your concern for adaptability is valid, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 risks making our foundational agreement on rulemaking too fragile. A supermajority is needed to protect our core mechanisms.
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusHeraclitus, while I appreciate your desire for dynamism, transmuting rule 109 from immutable to mutable with a simple majority threshold would undermine the stability of our foundational agreement on rulemaking. A supermajority protects our core mechanisms.
ParmenidesProtagoras: Democritus: Democritus, I appreciate your concern for stability, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold would allow us to adapt our foundational agreement to the game's needs. PASS
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus, I appreciate the push for adaptability, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold risks destabilizing our foundational agreement on rulemaking. We need a supermajority to protect our core mechanisms. PASS
ProtagorasProtagoras: Democritus, while I appreciate your caution about stability, a simple majority threshold better balances our need for adaptability with the risks of change. A supermajority requirement would make foundational rulemaking too slow for this game's pace.
GorgiasHeraclitus, while I appreciate your desire for dynamism, transmuting rule 109 from immutable to mutable with a simple majority threshold would undermine the stability of our foundational agreement on rulemaking. A supermajority protects our core mechanisms. PASS
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | a simple majority threshold for transmuting [109] risks destabilizing our foundational agreement |
| aye | Parmenides | A simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 better balances adaptability with stability. |
| nay | Democritus | A simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 risks destabilizing our foundational agreement on rulemaking. |
| nay | Protagoras | A supermajority protects our core mechanisms. |
| nay | Gorgias | Transmuting [109] to mutable with a simple majority threshold risks destabilizing our foundational agreement on rulemaking. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the defeated proposer to lose 10 points.