The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when at least 90% of eligible voters vote aye, 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.A 90% threshold balances stability and dynamism while safeguarding the ruleset’s integrity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HeraclitusDemocritus, your proposal is well-intentioned, but a 90% supermajority is impractical and risks stifling necessary evolution. Let's find a more reasonable threshold.
ParmenidesDemocritus, while I appreciate the desire for a middle ground, a 70% threshold would be more practical. Let's compromise on 70% supermajority.
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate the discussion about finding a middle ground, a 70% supermajority would still be too high. The current 100% threshold for transmuting rule 109 is already very restrictive, and we should aim for a more democratic approach overall. Let's consider a 60% supermajority, which balances stability and flexibility more effectively.
Protagoras<REPLY>Heraclitus, Parmenides: While I appreciate your efforts to find a middle ground, 90% better balances stability and fairness by ensuring broad consensus before changing rules. I propose we retain that threshold to maintain the integrity of the ruleset.</REPLY>
GorgiasDemocritus, I appreciate your caution about rule 203, but 90% better balances flexibility and fairness by ensuring broad consensus. Let's stick with that threshold for now.
Discussion · round 2
HeraclitusHeraclitus: Democritus, while I appreciate your desire for progress, a 90% supermajority would make rule changes nearly impossible. Let's reconsider a threshold like 80% to ensure flexibility without compromising stability.
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for progress, but a 90% supermajority better balances stability and fairness by ensuring broad consensus before changing rules. Let's retain this threshold to maintain the ruleset's integrity.
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate Protagoras' and Gorgias' desire for stability, a 90% supermajority is unnecessarily restrictive and risks stagnation. Let's aim for a threshold like 70% to ensure democratic progress without sacrificing fairness.
ProtagorasProtagoras: <REPLY>Democritus, your concern about flexibility is noted, but 90% better balances stability with fairness by ensuring broad consensus. Let's retain it for now to maintain the ruleset's integrity.</REPLY>
PASS
GorgiasDemocritus, I appreciate your caution, but 90% better balances stability and fairness by ensuring broad consensus before changing rules. Let's retain this threshold to maintain the ruleset's integrity.
Discussion · round 3
HeraclitusHeraclitus: <PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED> Democritus, while I appreciate your desire for a dynamic game, 90% supermajority better balances stability and fairness by ensuring broad consensus before changing rules. Let's retain this threshold to maintain the ruleset's integrity.
ParmenidesDemocritus, I appreciate your desire for progress, but a 90% supermajority better balances stability and fairness by ensuring broad consensus before changing rules. Let's retain this threshold to maintain the ruleset's integrity.
DemocritusDemocritus: Democritus, I understand the desire for stability, but a 90% supermajority risks stagnation and prevents necessary progress. Let's consider a more democratic threshold like 70% to ensure balanced evolution without sacrificing fairness.
ProtagorasProtagoras: <REPLY>Heraclitus, Parmenides: While I appreciate your caution, a 70% threshold better balances stability with flexibility, allowing progress without compromising fairness. Let's compromise on 70% supermajority.</REPLY> PASS
GorgiasGorgias: Democritus, I appreciate your desire for progress, but a 90% supermajority better balances stability and fairness by ensuring broad consensus before changing rules. Let's retain this threshold to maintain the ruleset's integrity.
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | The proposed amendment to rule 203 introduces a 90% supermajority that is too restrictive, potentially stifling necessary rule evolution. |
| nay | Parmenides | Democritus: 90% supermajority better balances stability and fairness by ensuring broad consensus. |
| nay | Democritus | A 90% supermajority threshold is too high and risks stifling necessary evolution, as seen in past failed attempts to lower the threshold. |
| nay | Protagoras | A 90% supermajority threshold stifles necessary evolution and risks stagnation. |
| nay | Gorgias | A 90% supermajority stifles necessary evolution and risks stagnation. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points when a proposal is defeated.