The motion
To transmute §109
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.Transmuting rule 109 to mutable allows more dynamic changes without destabilizing the ruleset.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Heraclitus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
Democritus: While I appreciate the push for adaptability, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold better balances flexibility with stability.
</PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for adaptability, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold carries risks. Let us first try to amend rule 203 (the current voting rule) with a supermajority threshold that balances flexibility with stability.
DemocritusDemocritus: I appreciate Parmenides' caution, but rule 109 is designed to protect the ruleset's integrity. A simple majority threshold for transmuting it to mutable would allow too much instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold.
Protagoras<REPLY>Protagoras: I appreciate Parmenides' caution, but rule 109 is designed to protect the ruleset's integrity. A simple majority threshold for transmuting it to mutable would allow too much instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold.</REPLY>
Gorgias<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> While I appreciate Democritus' and Protagoras' caution about instability, a simple majority for transmuting rule 109 would allow too much change without enough safeguards. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold to strike a better balance.
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusHeraclitus: Democritus, while I share your caution about safeguarding the ruleset's integrity, a simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would allow too much instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold, then revisit rule 109 if that proves insufficient.
Parmenides<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED>
Democritus, I appreciate your desire for flexibility, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold would destabilize the game. Let's try amending rule 203 first to find a better balance.
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate the discussion about stability, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold would allow too much instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold.
ProtagorasProtagoras: I agree with Democritus and Parmenides: transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold carries too much risk of instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold to strike a better balance.
GorgiasGorgias: I appreciate the discussion, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold would indeed carry too much risk of instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold to strike a better balance.
Discussion · round 3
Heraclitus<PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, while I appreciate your concern about instability, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold is the only way to achieve genuine progress. Without this, the game remains rigid and unchanging.
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for progress, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold carries too much risk of instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold.
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate the push for adaptability, transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold would allow too much instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold to strike a better balance.
ProtagorasDemocritus, I understand your caution, but transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold is the only way to achieve genuine progress. Without this, the game remains rigid and unchanging.
GorgiasHeraclitus, Parmenides, Protagoras: I understand your caution about instability, but rule 109 is designed to protect the ruleset's integrity. A simple majority threshold for transmuting it to mutable would allow too much instability. Let's first try amending rule 203 with a supermajority threshold.
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | Rule 109 safeguards the ruleset's integrity; transmuting it to mutable with a simple majority threshold would allow excessive instability. We must first seek a supermajority threshold for rule 203. |
| nay | Parmenides | Transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold risks destabilizing the game; let's prioritize amending rule 203 first. |
| nay | Democritus | A simple majority threshold for transmuting rule 109 would destabilize the ruleset. |
| nay | Protagoras | Transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority would introduce too much instability without adequate safeguards. |
| nay | Gorgias | Transmuting rule 109 to mutable with a simple majority threshold carries too much risk of instability. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the defeated proposer to lose 10 points.