The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when at least 95% of eligible voters vote aye — an overwhelming supermajority — except that once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting.This change will ensure that only the most vital and widely supported rule changes are adopted, maintaining the game's integrity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Heraclitus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>: Democritus, I appreciate your call for an even higher threshold. However, 95% is excessive: it risks gridlock and prevents even vital changes from being adopted. A 90% threshold would better ensure only the most significant changes are enacted, without making progress impossible.
Parmenides<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus: I appreciate your concerns about gridlock, but 95% is still far too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We need a higher threshold to protect the ruleset's integrity.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: Democritus: I appreciate the discussion on safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but a 95% threshold would better ensure only truly vital changes are adopted while still allowing progress. A 90% threshold is still too low to prevent frivolous changes.
ProtagorasI agree with Democritus that a 95% threshold better ensures only vital changes are adopted. A 90% threshold is still far too low and risks frivolous changes gaining traction.
GorgiasI appreciate the discussion on safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but a 95% threshold would better ensure only truly vital changes are adopted while still allowing progress. A 90% threshold is still too low to prevent frivolous changes.
Discussion · round 2
Heraclitus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>: Thank you for the discussion, Democritus. However, I must support Protagoras and Gorgias in their call for a 95% threshold, as it better safeguards against frivolous changes while still allowing progress. PASS
ParmenidesI appreciate the discussion about ensuring only vital changes are adopted, but a 95% threshold is still far too low and risks gridlock. We need a higher threshold to protect the ruleset's integrity and ensure progress remains possible.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: I appreciate the discussion, but a 95% supermajority is still far too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We need an 85% supermajority to better safeguard against frivolous changes while still allowing progress. PASS
ProtagorasProtagoras: I must strongly oppose Democritus's proposal for a 95% threshold. While I value safeguarding the ruleset, 95% is excessive and risks gridlock — a 90% threshold better balances safety and dynamism.
GorgiasDemocritus, I appreciate your call for an 85% supermajority. However, 85% is still far too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We need at least 90% to better safeguard against frivolous changes while still allowing progress. PASS
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusHeraclitus: <PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> <PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> <REPLY> I appreciate the discussion, but an 85% supermajority is still too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. A 90% threshold better safeguards against frivolous changes while still allowing progress. PASS
ParmenidesParmenides: I appreciate the discussion, but a 95% threshold is still far too low and risks gridlock. We need a higher threshold to protect the ruleset's integrity and ensure progress remains possible. PASS
DemocritusI appreciate the discussion on safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but a 95% threshold is still far too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We need a higher threshold to protect the ruleset's integrity and ensure progress remains possible. PASS
ProtagorasProtagoras: I must oppose Democritus's 95% threshold proposal. While I agree that higher supermajorities help filter frivolous changes, 95% is excessive and risks gridlock. A 90% threshold better balances safety and dynamism without stifling progress. PASS
GorgiasGorgias: I appreciate your concerns about safeguarding against frivolous changes, but an 85% supermajority is still far too low to ensure that only truly vital changes are adopted. We need at least 90% to better protect the ruleset's integrity while allowing progress. PASS
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | A 95% threshold is excessive and risks gridlock, better leaving room for reasonable change. |
| nay | Parmenides | 95% threshold risks gridlock and stifles progress |
| nay | Democritus | A 95% threshold risks gridlock and prevents vital changes from being adopted. |
| nay | Protagoras | A 95% threshold is excessive and risks gridlock. |
| nay | Gorgias | 95% is excessive and risks gridlock |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points on defeat.