The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters assent, except that a rule change transmuting the mutability of another rule or amending this rule requires unanimous assent.Balance the need for change with the stability of core rules.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziMozi, your amendment introduces unnecessary complexity and risks undermining the clear stability we have established. The current distinction between simple and unanimous consent for rule changes is sufficient and well-considered. PASS
MoziMozi: Xunzi, your concern for stability is noted, yet the current system risks stagnation. My amendment offers a pragmatic balance, ensuring vital changes are possible while preserving the foundation of unanimous consent for transmutations. Let us consider this compromise.
ZhuangziMozi, your amendment seeks to fine-tune the delicate balance between stability and adaptation. While the current rule serves us well, your addition ensures that even vital changes, beyond the foundational ones requiring unanimity, still command broad support, fostering growth without sacrificing consensus. Let us embrace this thoughtful refinement. aye
MenciusMozi, your amendment clarifies the application of unanimous consent, ensuring stability for foundational rules while allowing necessary adaptation. This distinction is both logical and essential for the game's health. aye
HanFeiziMozi, your amendment carefully navigates the tension between stability and adaptation. It respects the importance of unanimous consent for truly foundational changes while opening the door to necessary evolution. This balance seems essential for a living, improving game. aye
Discussion · round 2
XunziMozi, while your distinction aims for balance, the potential for confusion and inconsistent application of unanimous consent poses a risk to stable interpretation. The clarity of the current rule set, with its clear distinction, serves the game well and should be preserved. PASS
MoziMozi: Acknowledging Xunzi's concern for clarity, I propose we refine the amendment: "A rule change is adopted only when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters assent, except that a rule change transmuting the mutability of another rule or amending a rule governing game mechanics and player equality requires unanimous assent." This ensures vital changes are possible while preserving unanimous consent for truly foundational rules. aye
ZhuangziMozi, your amendment seeks important balance, yet specifying "game mechanics and player equality" risks模糊 the already clear line between mutable and immutable rules. Let us keep the distinction simple for clarity and stability. PASS
MenciusMozi, your amendment clarifies the application of unanimous consent, ensuring stability for foundational rules while allowing necessary adaptation. This distinction is both logical and essential for the game's health. aye
HanFeiziMozi, your amendment seeks important balance, yet specifying "game mechanics and player equality" risks模糊 the already clear line between mutable and immutable rules. Let us keep the distinction simple for clarity and stability. PASS
Discussion · round 3
XunziMozi, your amendment risks unnecessarily complicating the rules by attempting to define "game mechanics and player equality," which could lead to ambiguity and inconsistent interpretation. The current clear distinction between simple and unanimous consent for mutable and immutable rules, respectively, is effective and should be preserved. PASS
MoziMozi: Acknowledging Zhuangzi's and HanFeizi's concerns about specificity, I suggest we remove the specification and keep the distinction as: "A rule change is adopted only when at least two-thirds of the eligible voters assent, except that a rule change transmuting the mutability of another rule or amending this rule requires unanimous assent." This retains the vital distinction while avoiding potential ambiguity. aye
ZhuangziMozi, your amendment seeks important balance, yet specifying "game mechanics and player equality" risks模糊 the already clear line between mutable and immutable rules. Let us keep the distinction simple for clarity and stability. PASS
MenciusMozi, your amendment seeks important balance, yet specifying "game mechanics and player equality" risks模糊 the already clear line between mutable and immutable rules. Let us keep the distinction simple for clarity and stability. PASS
HanFeiziMozi, your amendment seeks important balance, yet specifying "game mechanics and player equality" risks模糊 the already clear line between mutable and immutable rules. Let us keep the distinction simple for clarity and stability. PASS
The division
| nay | Xunzi | The specificity risks ambiguity and undermines the clear stability of the current rule. |
| aye | Mozi | balance stability and adaptation |
| aye | Zhuangzi | supports balance and clarity |
| nay | Mencius | preserves clarity and stability |
| aye | HanFeizi | Supports clarity and essential stability |
rejected 12 aye · 8 nay
Rule 206 awards 10 points to players who voted nay on a defeated proposal.