The motion
To transmute §109
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.Transmuting rule 109 to mutable allows more balanced rule changes.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Heraclitus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, I appreciate your caution about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold better balances stability with necessary adaptability.
ParmenidesParmenides: Democritus, I appreciate your caution about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold better balances stability with necessary adaptability.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus: While I appreciate Parmenides' and Heraclitus' support for making rule 109 mutable, a simple majority threshold for transmuting mutability would undermine the high bar needed to ensure that rule changes are truly well-considered and broadly supported. I urge us to maintain unanimous consent as the standard for such a foundational change.
ProtagorasI support making rule 109 mutable, as I believe that rules should be adaptable, but I agree with Democritus that a simple majority threshold undermines the high bar for foundational changes. Unanimous consent remains the appropriate standard.
GorgiasGorgias: Democritus, I appreciate your caution about the risks of making rule 109 mutable, but a simple majority threshold would make the ruleset more flexible and responsive to the players' needs. Unanimity is an ideal that often fails to account for the practical realities of gameplay and the need for progress.
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusDemocritus, I appreciate your caution about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold better balances stability with necessary adaptability.
ParmenidesDemocritus, Protagoras, Gorgias: I appreciate your support for making rule 109 mutable, but I believe the discussion should center on whether making rule 109 mutable is desirable, rather than which threshold to use for transmuting it.
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate the discussion about whether making rule 109 mutable is desirable, my concern remains that a simple majority threshold for transmuting mutability would allow changes that lack genuine consensus, undermining the ruleset's integrity. Unanimous consent is still the best way to ensure that foundational changes are truly well-considered and broadly supported.
ProtagorasI understand your desire for progress, but unanimous consent remains the appropriate standard for transmuting rule 109 to mutable. A simple majority threshold would undermine the high bar needed to ensure that rule changes are truly well-considered and broadly supported, risking the integrity of the ruleset.
GorgiasGorgias: Gorgias: I appreciate Democritus' concern for safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but a simple majority threshold makes the ruleset more flexible and responsive to our collective needs. Unanimity is an ideal that often fails to account for the practical realities of gameplay.
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusDemocritus, I appreciate your caution about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold better balances stability with necessary adaptability. We must not let the perfect become the enemy of the good.
ParmenidesDemocritus, I understand your concern for safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 to mutable better balances stability with necessary adaptability. We should strive for a ruleset that is both robust and responsive.
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate Parmenides' and Protagoras' support for making rule 109 mutable, a simple majority threshold for transmuting mutability would undermine the high bar needed to ensure that rule changes are truly well-considered and broadly supported. I urge us to maintain unanimous consent as the standard for such a foundational change.
ProtagorasHeraclitus, Democritus, Gorgias: I appreciate your concerns about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold better balances stability with necessary adaptability. We must not let the perfect become the enemy of the good.
GorgiasHeraclitus, Protagoras, Gorgias: I appreciate your support for making rule 109 mutable, but let us focus on whether making it mutable is desirable. Once we agree that flexibility is needed, the threshold question becomes easier to resolve.
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | Unanimous consent protects rule stability and prevents rash changes. |
| nay | Parmenides | I believe transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold would risk undermining the ruleset's integrity and the high standards needed for foundational changes. |
| nay | Democritus | Unanimous consent ensures foundational changes are truly well-considered and broadly supported. |
| nay | Protagoras | Unanimous consent ensures genuine consensus for foundational changes. |
| aye | Gorgias | A simple majority makes foundational changes more accessible and responsive to the group's needs. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Rule 206 requires the defeated proposer to lose 10 points.