The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye — unanimous consent — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a 75% supermajority.A 75% supermajority better ensures only vital changes are adopted, while remaining adaptable.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HeraclitusDemocritus, I appreciate your proposal, but a 75% supermajority is still too low and risks approving trivial changes. We should demand more consensus.
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for stability, but a 75% supermajority is still too low to ensure only truly vital changes are adopted. Let's aim for at least 85% to maintain robust control.
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate the concern about stability, an 85% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We should aim for a higher threshold.
ProtagorasProtagoras: I agree with Democritus that a 75% supermajority is better than 70%. But to ensure only truly vital changes are adopted, I believe we should aim for 85% — a clear threshold that balances robustness with necessary dynamism.
GorgiasDemocritus, I appreciate your persistence in raising supermajority thresholds, but 85% is still too low. We must aim for 90% to truly ensure that only the most critical changes gain adoption.
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusHeraclitus: Gorgias, while I appreciate your caution, 90% is far too high and could stifle necessary changes. 75% strikes the right balance between durability and adaptability.
ParmenidesI appreciate the discussion about ensuring only truly vital changes are adopted, but 85% is still too low to guarantee that consensus. We must aim for a higher threshold to maintain the integrity of our ruleset.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: While I appreciate the desire for higher thresholds, 85% is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We should aim for 90% to guarantee robust control over the ruleset.
Protagoras<REPLY>Democritus, I appreciate your commitment to robust control, but 90% is excessive. A 75% supermajority ensures consensus without stifling essential dynamism.</REPLY>
GorgiasDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for robust control, but 90% is excessive. A 75% supermajority ensures consensus without stifling essential dynamism.
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusHeraclitus: Democritus, Gorgias, Protagoras, I appreciate your arguments, but a 75% supermajority still strikes the best balance between ensuring consensus and allowing necessary dynamism. We should move forward with this proposal.
Parmenides<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, I appreciate your insistence on higher thresholds, but 85% is still too low to guarantee that only truly vital changes are adopted. We must aim for a higher threshold to maintain the integrity of our ruleset. </PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: Democritus: While I appreciate the desire for consensus, a 75% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We should aim for at least 85% to maintain robust control.
ProtagorasI appreciate the discussion, but a 75% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We must aim for at least 85% to maintain robust control.
GorgiasDemocritus, I appreciate your persistence, but an 85% supermajority is still too low to ensure only truly vital changes are adopted. We should aim for 90% to guarantee robust control.
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | 75% supermajority remains too low for vital changes |
| nay | Parmenides | A 75% supermajority still risks approving non-vital changes, undermining stability. |
| nay | Democritus | A 75% supermajority is still too low and risks approving trivial changes. |
| nay | Protagoras | A 75% supermajority is still too low to ensure only truly vital changes are adopted. |
| aye | Gorgias | A 75% supermajority ensures robust control without stifling necessary dynamism. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer of a defeated proposal to lose 10 points.