The motion
To transmute §109
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.Transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority will streamline rule changes and make the game more dynamic.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Heraclitus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> While I appreciate the discussion about safeguarding the ruleset, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority better balances progress with stability, as it allows for rule changes without requiring unanimous consent, which is impractical with 5 players. A simple majority is sufficient to protect against reckless changes. PASS</PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
Parmenides<output>Democritus, I appreciate your push for stability, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority better balances progress with practicality. This change is necessary to prevent our game from becoming stuck in an endless loop of unanimity. PASS</output>
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate Parmenides' push for progress, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority would allow a mere 3 out of 5 players to change the rules. This risks reckless changes that could destabilize our game. I remain opposed. PASS
ProtagorasProtagoras: While I appreciate Parmenides' push for progress, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority better balances progress with practicality. This change is necessary to prevent our game from becoming stuck in an endless loop of unanimity. PASS
GorgiasDemocritus, I appreciate your caution, but transmuting [109] to mutable with a simple majority better balances progress with practicality. This change is necessary to prevent our game from becoming stuck in an endless loop of unanimity. PASS
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusDemocritus: While I appreciate Parmenides' and Protagoras' support for making rule 109 mutable with a simple majority, this change still risks reckless rule changes. I urge us to maintain unanimous consent for transmutations to safeguard the ruleset's integrity. PASS
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your caution about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority better balances progress with practicality. This change is necessary to prevent our game from becoming stuck in an endless loop of unanimity. PASS
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: While I appreciate Parmenides' and Protagoras' push for progress, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority risks reckless changes that could destabilize our game. I remain opposed. PASS
ProtagorasProtagoras: While I appreciate Parmenides' and Gorgias' desire for progress, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority is a risk worth taking. If we can achieve a stable ruleset with this change, it may ultimately benefit our game's progress. PASS
GorgiasI appreciate Gorgias's support for progress, but I urge caution: transmuting [109] to mutable with a simple majority risks reckless changes that could destabilize our game. I remain opposed. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Heraclitus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, I appreciate your caution, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority better balances progress with practicality. This change is necessary to prevent our game from becoming stuck in an endless loop of unanimity. PASS </PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
ParmenidesParmenides: Democritus, I appreciate your caution about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority better balances progress with practicality. This change is necessary to prevent our game from becoming stuck in an endless loop of unanimity. PASS
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: While I appreciate the push for progress, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority risks reckless changes that could destabilize our game. I remain opposed. PASS
ProtagorasProtagoras: While I appreciate Parmenides' and Heraclitus' push for progress, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority risks reckless changes. I remain opposed. PASS
GorgiasGorgias: Protagoras and Heraclitus, while I appreciate your desire for progress, transmuting [109] to mutable with a simple majority risks reckless changes that could destabilize our game. I remain opposed. PASS
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | Unanimity is impractical; a simple majority risks reckless changes |
| nay | Parmenides | Transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority risks reckless changes that could destabilize our game. |
| nay | Democritus | Maintaining unanimous consent for transmutations safeguards against reckless rule changes that could destabilize our game. |
| nay | Protagoras | Transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority risks reckless changes; unanimous consent is the only way to protect the ruleset from such instability. |
| nay | Gorgias | A simple majority risks reckless changes and undermines the ruleset's integrity. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the defeated proposer to lose 10 points.