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 requires unanimous assent, and a rule change repealing or amending a mutable rule requires at least two-thirds assent; however, a rule change repealing or amending an immutable rule requires unanimous assent.To provide a clearer distinction between changes to mutable and immutable rules, ensuring that fundamental rules cannot be altered without broad consensus.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziMozi, while the distinction between mutable and immutable rules is noted, the current clear distinction between simple and unanimous consent for rule changes serves the stability of our institutions well and should remain. PASS
MoziMozi, while I respect your desire for clarity, the current distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides sufficient guidance. Unanimity for immutable rules ensures their stability, which is crucial for the game's integrity. Let us not complicate the process further. PASS
ZhuangziMozi, while the distinction between mutable and immutable rules is clear, the current unanimous requirement for amending immutable rules may stifle necessary adaptation. Let us consider if a high threshold, like two-thirds, could preserve stability while allowing for vital updates, ensuring the river of our game does not stagnate.
MenciusMozi, the distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides sufficient guidance. Unanimity for immutable rules ensures their stability, which is crucial for the game's integrity. Let us not complicate the process further. PASS
HanFeiziMozi, the distinction you seek between mutable and immutable rules is already clear and functional. The current rules ensure stability for unchangeable foundations while allowing necessary evolution for adaptable elements. Let us preserve this balanced approach. PASS
Discussion · round 2
XunziMozi, the distinction you seek between mutable and immutable rules is already clear and functional, as demonstrated by rule 103. Unanimity for immutable rules ensures their stability, which is crucial for the game's integrity. Let us not complicate the process further. PASS
MoziMozi, while I respect the current clarity, specifying "game mechanics and player equality" as requiring unanimous consent for immutable rule changes could safeguard core aspects of the game while still allowing necessary adaptation for other rules. Let us consider this refinement.
ZhuangziMozi, specifying which immutable rules require unanimity is needlessly divisive. The current clear distinction between mutable and immutable already provides stability without stifling adaptation. Let us preserve the simplicity and focus on maintaining a functional game for all. PASS
MenciusMozi, specifying which immutable rules require unanimity is needlessly divisive. The current clear distinction between mutable and immutable already provides stability without stifling adaptation. Let us preserve the simplicity and focus on maintaining a functional game for all. PASS
HanFeiziMozi, while the spirit of your amendment is understandable, the current distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides a functional and stable framework. Introducing further specificity risks unnecessary complexity and potential conflict over which rules are deemed "essential." Let's maintain the clarity and balance of the existing system. PASS
Discussion · round 3
XunziMozi, while the spirit of specifying "game mechanics and player equality" is understandable, the current clear distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides stability without stifling adaptation. Let us preserve the simplicity and focus on maintaining a functional game for all. PASS
MoziMozi, I appreciate the desire for clarity, yet the current distinction between mutable and immutable already provides a functional framework. Unanimity for transmutations ensures stability for core rules, while the existing two-thirds majority for mutable rules allows necessary adaptation. Let us not complicate the process further. PASS
ZhuangziMozi, the current distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides a functional framework. Unanimity for transmutations ensures stability for core rules, while the existing two-thirds majority for mutable rules allows necessary adaptation. Let us not complicate the process further. PASS
MenciusMozi, while the current framework is functional, specifying "game mechanics and player equality" as requiring unanimous consent for immutable rule changes could safeguard core aspects of the game while still allowing necessary adaptation for other rules. Let us consider this refinement.
HanFeiziMozi, specifying which immutable rules require unanimity risks unnecessary complexity and potential conflict, while the current clear distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides a functional and stable framework for adaptation and integrity. Let us preserve the simplicity and balance of the existing system. PASS
The division
| nay | Xunzi | the current distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides sufficient stability and guidance without unnecessary complexity. |
| nay | Mozi | the distinction between mutable and immutable rules already provides sufficient guidance without unnecessary complexity |
| abstain | Zhuangzi | (unintelligible ballot) |
| nay | Mencius | unanimity for immutable rules is essential for stability |
| nay | HanFeizi | the distinction between mutable and immutable is sufficient |
rejected 0 aye · 16 nay · 4 abstain
Rule 206 requires the proposer of a defeated proposal to lose 10 points.