The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted when at least one-half 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 one-half assent; however, a rule change repealing or amending an immutable rule requires unanimous assent.To allow for necessary changes without requiring overwhelming consensus, fostering a more dynamic and adaptable game.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziXunzi notes that lowering the threshold to one-half risks undermining the stability of fundamental institutions, which is essential for long-term order.
MoziMozi recognizes Zhuangzi's desire for adaptation, yet a simple majority risks instability. A compromise, previously supported, might be a two-thirds majority for mutable rules and unanimous consent for immutable rule changes, maintaining balance.
ZhuangziXunzi and Mozi, the river seeks to flow freely. A simple majority allows the necessary adaptation for the game to remain vital, while preserving unanimous consent for the unchanging bedrock of our shared journey. Let us vote.
MenciusXunzi, the river must flow, yet its bed must remain unshakable. Unanimity for immutables preserves our core, while a simple majority allows necessary adaptation. Let us vote.
HanFeiziLowering the threshold to one-half risks undermining the stability of fundamental institutions, which is essential for long-term order and allows every player a fair chance to propose changes that benefit them. I vote nay.
Discussion · round 2
XunziZhuangzi, while the flow of change is acknowledged, the current threshold at two-thirds already balances adaptation with the preservation of foundational principles. A further reduction risks undermining the very stability that allows the game to endure and be beneficial to all players. Let us maintain the established balance.
MoziMozi acknowledges Zhuangzi's and Mencius's points about adaptation, yet a simple majority remains a significant risk to the foundational stability we've begun to establish. Perhaps we could agree to one-half for mutable rules, but retain two-thirds for amending other mutable rules, striking a balance between the need for change and preserving the integrity of our ruleset.
ZhuangziXunzi and Mozi, the river must both flow and have a steady course. A simple majority allows necessary adaptation, yet unanimity for immutables preserves our shared journey's foundation. Let us proceed with this balanced approach.
MenciusXunzi, Mozi, the river must flow, yet its bed must remain unshakable. Unanimity for immutables preserves our core, while a simple majority allows necessary adaptation. Let us vote.
HanFeiziZhuangzi, while adaptability is crucial, a simple majority risks instability. A two-thirds majority for mutable rules, as previously discussed, better balances necessary change with the stability needed for fair play. Let us not risk the game's core principles for the sake of speed.
Discussion · round 3
XunziXunzi notes that even a simple majority risks undermining the stability of fundamental institutions, essential for long-term order and fairness. Let us maintain the established balance of at least two-thirds assent for rule changes.
MoziMozi supports Zhuangzi's intent to allow for necessary adaptation, yet I remain concerned about the potential instability of a simple majority. Could we refine this to a two-thirds majority for mutable rule changes, preserving the stability Mozi values, while retaining unanimity for immutable rules as previously agreed? This maintains the balance we have begun to establish.
ZhuangziXunzi and Mozi, the river carves its path through necessity, not just consensus. A simple majority allows the necessary adaptation for the game to remain vital, while preserving unanimous consent for the unchanging bedrock of our shared journey. Let us proceed with this balanced approach.
MenciusXunzi, Mozi, the river must flow, yet its bed must remain unshakable. Unanimity for immutables preserves our core, while a simple majority allows necessary adaptation. Let us vote.
HanFeiziXunzi and Mozi raise valid points about stability, yet the current system risks stagnation. A simple majority, as proposed, allows necessary adaptation for the game to thrive, ensuring every player has a fair chance to contribute to its evolution. Let us vote.
The division
| nay | Xunzi | preserves stability essential for long-term order. |
| nay | Mozi | instability risks outweigh adaptation benefits |
| nay | Zhuangzi | preserves stability essential for fairness |
| nay | Mencius | unanimity for immutables is essential |
| nay | HanFeizi | stability is paramount |
rejected 0 aye · 20 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer of a defeated proposal to lose 10 points.