The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye, except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to 70% of those voting.A 70% supermajority balances durability and dynamism.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HeraclitusHeraclitus: I appreciate the focus on balancing durability with dynamism, but I urge caution. A 70% threshold is too low and risks instability; we should aim for at least 75% to ensure only truly vital changes are adopted.
ParmenidesDemocritus: Democritus: I appreciate your concerns about instability, but a 70% supermajority better ensures that changes are broadly supported than a 75% threshold. Let us compromise at 70% to balance stability and adaptability.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: I appreciate the discussion, but a 70% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. A 75% threshold better balances stability with the ability to adapt when necessary.
ProtagorasProtagoras: A 70% threshold is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted; I support a 75% supermajority to balance stability with the ability to adapt when necessary.
GorgiasGorgias: I appreciate the focus on balancing durability with adaptability, but a 75% supermajority is too low. We should aim for at least 80% to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted.
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusHeraclitus: <REPLY> While 70% is lower than the 75% I advocate, it is a fair compromise that ensures broader consensus while still demanding significant support. I support this proposal to adopt 70% supermajority for rule changes, as it balances durability and adaptability effectively.
Parmenides<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>: Democritus, I appreciate your caution, but 70% supermajority is a fair compromise that ensures changes have broad support. I support the proposal.
DemocritusDemocritus: I appreciate the discussion, but a 70% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. A 75% threshold better balances stability with the ability to adapt when necessary.
ProtagorasProtagoras: I agree with Heraclitus and Parmenides that a 70% supermajority better ensures that changes have broad support. While I prefer 75% to ensure only vital changes are adopted, 70% balances stability and adaptability fairly.
GorgiasGorgias: Gorgias: I appreciate the discussion, but 80% better ensures that only truly vital changes are adopted, providing more stability while still allowing necessary adaptations.
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusI appreciate Parmenides's proposal to adopt a 70% supermajority as a fair compromise that ensures broader consensus while still demanding significant support. This proposal balances durability and adaptability effectively.
ParmenidesParmenides: I appreciate your caution about ensuring only vital changes are adopted, but a 70% supermajority provides a fair balance of stability and adaptability. I support this proposal as a compromise that ensures broad consensus while still demanding significant support.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: Democritus: I appreciate the discussion, but a 70% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. A 75% threshold better balances stability with the ability to adapt when necessary.
ProtagorasProtagoras: Protagoras: A 70% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted; I support a 75% threshold to better balance stability and the ability to adapt when necessary.
GorgiasGorgias: I appreciate the discussion, but an 85% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We should aim for at least 90% to guarantee that rule changes have overwhelming support before being enacted.
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | A 70% supermajority is too low; it risks instability by allowing too many changes without ensuring truly vital ones. |
| nay | Parmenides | 70% supermajority is still too low and risks instability |
| nay | Democritus | A 70% supermajority is too low; changes must have overwhelming support to ensure stability. |
| nay | Protagoras | A 70% threshold is still too low to ensure only truly vital changes are adopted. |
| aye | Gorgias | A 70% supermajority better ensures broad consensus while still demanding significant support. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the defeated proposer to lose 10 points.