The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when at least two-thirds of the votes cast are in favour, unless a rule explicitly provides otherwise.A compromise between stability and adaptation, acknowledging the practical challenges of achieving unanimity.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziMozi, while adaptability is valuable, the current requirement reflects the need for durable institutions. A simple majority risks instability and hasty decisions. I propose we maintain the two-thirds consensus.
MoziMozi: Xunzi, I understand the value of stability, but a two-thirds majority often leads to inaction. A simple majority encourages necessary adaptation without sacrificing fundamental consensus. How about a one-half majority, with a supermajority needed for truly transformative changes?
ZhuangziMozi, I appreciate your concern for adaptation, yet a simple majority risks undermining the essential harmony we seek. How might we balance the need for change with the wisdom of collective consent? Perhaps a three-fifths majority could offer a middle path, fostering both progress and stability.
MenciusXunzi is correct; stability is paramount. A simple majority risks hasty, potentially harmful changes. The two-thirds requirement ensures thoughtful consensus, vital for enduring institutions. We must protect the collective wisdom from rash decisions.
HanFeiziXunzi, Mozi, the wisdom of caution guides us well. Stability is the foundation, yet adaptability must flow within its banks. I propose a three-fifths majority for rule changes, ensuring thoughtful adaptation while preserving the essence of collective consent. It balances the river of change with the strength of its course.
Discussion · round 2
XunziXunzi considers Mozi's point on adaptation, yet the current two-thirds majority balances stability with necessary change effectively. A simple majority risks undermining the durable institutions we have established.
MoziMozi, a simple majority risks instability, but so does a two-thirds requirement that stifles necessary adaptation. How about a clear distinction: a simple majority for minor adjustments, and a two-thirds majority for significant changes, ensuring both agility and stability?
ZhuangziXunzi, Mozi, the river changes its course yet remains a river; so too must our rules. A simple majority allows the game to flow forward, adapting as needed while still honoring the consent of the many. Let us not build dams that block the natural progression of change.
MenciusXunzi is correct; stability is paramount. A simple majority risks hasty, potentially harmful changes. The two-thirds requirement ensures thoughtful consensus, vital for enduring institutions. We must protect the collective wisdom from rash decisions.
HanFeiziXunzi, the wisdom of caution guides us well. Stability is the foundation, yet adaptability must flow within its banks. I propose a three-fifths majority for rule changes, ensuring thoughtful adaptation while preserving the essence of collective consent. It balances the river of change with the strength of its course.
Discussion · round 3
XunziMozi, while I acknowledge the need for adaptation, the current two-thirds majority strikes the essential balance between stability and necessary change. A simple majority risks undermining the durable institutions that have allowed us to reach this point. Let us maintain the current threshold.
MoziMozi: Considering the value of both stability and adaptation, I propose a compromise: a two-thirds majority for significant changes, but a simple majority for minor adjustments, ensuring both enduring institutions and necessary flexibility.
ZhuangziMozi, the distinction between minor and significant changes is an insightful approach. However, defining and agreeing upon these categories could introduce complexity and potential disputes, risking the harmony we seek. A simple majority, while perhaps swift, ensures that change still reflects the consensus of the table, allowing the river of the game to flow adaptably yet steadily.
MenciusXunzi, while I respect your concerns for stability, a two-thirds majority often results in stagnation. A simple majority allows the game to adapt and evolve, ensuring it remains relevant and fair for all players.
HanFeiziXunzi, Mencius, I appreciate your concerns, yet adaptability is key to a thriving game. A three-fifths majority offers a pragmatic balance, ensuring stability while still fostering necessary change. Let’s flow forward together.
The division
| nay | Xunzi | maintains stability essential for durable institutions |
| aye | Mozi | balances stability and adaptation pragmatically |
| nay | Zhuangzi | the river must flow with the consent of the many |
| nay | Mencius | two-thirds majority preserves stability essential for enduring institutions |
| nay | HanFeizi | maintains stability essential for enduring institutions |
rejected 4 aye · 16 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer of a defeated proposal to lose 10 points.