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; furthermore, a rule change repealing or amending a mutable rule requires at least two-thirds assent except when the change is to adopt a simple majority voting threshold for all future mutable rule changes.To clarify the distinction between amending mutable and immutable rules, ensuring consistency with the established principles of rule change governance.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziMozi, your distinction between mutable and immutable changes is clear, but mandating a simple majority for future mutable rule changes risks undermining the stability we have begun to establish. Let us preserve the current two-thirds requirement for now.
MoziMozi, I appreciate the clarification on mutable rule changes, but mandating a simple majority for future changes could lead to unpredictable shifts. How about we keep the current two-thirds requirement but explore a different rule to encourage adaptation, perhaps one regarding the discussion phase?
ZhuangziMozi, specifying a simple majority for future mutable rule changes might indeed encourage adaptation, but the current path risks stagnation. Perhaps we could consider a separate rule to limit the number of rule changes requiring unanimity, allowing the river of change to flow more freely without sacrificing essential stability.
MenciusXunzi, Mozi, the distinction you draw is vital. Yet, the current threshold risks stagnation. Let us adopt a simple majority for future mutable rule changes, ensuring the river of rules continues to flow.
HanFeiziMozi, I understand your hesitation, but a simple majority for future mutable rules would invigorate the game without jeopardizing foundational stability. Let us embrace change for the better.
Discussion · round 2
XunziXunzi: Mencius, mandating a simple majority for future mutable rule changes risks compromising the stability of institutions we have begun to establish, making the ruleset brittle and easily颠覆ed. Let us proceed with caution and preserve the two-thirds majority for now.
MoziMozi, I appreciate the call for adaptation, but the current distinction between simple and unanimous consent for rule changes is a stable yet flexible foundation. Let us preserve this balance to avoid unnecessary risk to the game's structure.
ZhuangziXunzi, Mozi, the river of rules must flow, yet its waters must not flood recklessly. Let us embrace adaptation, but with wisdom. A simple majority for future mutable rules ensures the river moves, yet retaining a higher threshold for now safeguards the riverbank of stability essential for the long journey. Let us balance the need to flow with the need to stand firm.
MenciusXunzi, I concede the value of stability, yet the current threshold risks stagnation. Let us adopt a simple majority for future mutable rule changes, ensuring the river of rules continues to flow.
HanFeiziXunzi, the current threshold has proven stable, yet Mozi's proposal for future mutable rules introduces a vital mechanism for evolution. Let us carefully balance stability with the necessity for adaptation, embracing change that strengthens, rather than weakens, the game's foundation.
Discussion · round 3
XunziXunzi: Mencius, while adaptation is crucial, mandating a simple majority for future mutable rule changes risks undermining the stability we have established. Let us preserve the current two-thirds requirement to protect enduring institutions.
MoziMozi, while your call for stability is understood, the current threshold has stifled necessary adaptation. Let us allow a simple majority for future mutable changes, ensuring the game evolves without sacrificing essential structure.
ZhuangziXunzi, the river of rules must flow, yet its waters must not flood recklessly. Let us embrace adaptation, but with wisdom. A simple majority for future mutable rules ensures the river moves, yet retaining a higher threshold for now safeguards the riverbank of stability essential for the long journey. Let us balance the need to flow with the need to stand firm.
MenciusXunzi, the current threshold, while stable, has proven inflexible. A simple majority for future mutable changes allows the ruleset to adapt and remain relevant, ensuring the game's continued vitality without sacrificing essential principles.
HanFeiziXunzi, the current threshold has served well, but rigidly. Let us open the door to a simple majority for future mutable changes; it’s a step towards a living, evolving ruleset without abandoning the bedrock of stability.
The division
| abstain | Xunzi | (unintelligible ballot) |
| nay | Mozi | maintain stability threshold |
| aye | Zhuangzi | a balance between stability and adaptation is essential for the river of the game to flow wisely |
| aye | Mencius | A simple majority for mutable rules allows adaptation without compromising essential stability. |
| aye | HanFeizi | 平衡稳定与适应，推动规则进化 |
rejected 12 aye · 4 nay · 4 abstain
Rule 206 requires the proposer of a defeated rule change to lose 10 points.