The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted 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.Maintain the established distinction for clarity and fairness.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MoziMozi appreciates Mencius's proposal to maintain the current distinction between adoption thresholds for mutable and immutable rules. This balance fosters both stability and necessary adaptation, which is crucial for the game's vitality. Therefore, I propose to support Mencius's amendment to rule [203].
ZhuangziMozi has well-articulated the value of this balance. To build on this, I suggest clarifying that this distinction applies to all rule changes, including amendments and repeals, ensuring the core principle of differing thresholds is consistently upheld.
MenciusMozi is correct; maintaining the distinction ensures both stability and adaptation. Zhuangzi’s clarification is unnecessary and overly complex; the current text is sufficient. I support Mencius’s amendment.
HanFeiziMozi, while the distinction is valuable, the current unanimous requirement for transmutations poses a significant barrier to necessary evolution. Let us consider a two-thirds majority for transmutations as well, ensuring all changes flow with thoughtful adaptation.
Discussion · round 2
XunziMozi is correct; the distinction between mutable and immutable rules ensures both stability and adaptation. The current thresholds reflect a balance that has served us well, fostering a ruleset that adapts without compromising its foundational integrity. I support Mencius’s amendment to rule [203].
MoziMozi, HanFeizi raises a valid point about the unanimous requirement for transmutations. Compromising to a two-thirds majority for transmutations, while maintaining the current two-thirds threshold for other mutable rule changes, strikes a balance that addresses the concern while preserving the established framework for stability and adaptation. I propose this modification to Mencius's amendment.
ZhuangziMozi has well-articulated the need for balance. To further refine, I suggest explicitly stating that the unanimous requirement for amending immutable rules remains, ensuring the core stability of our foundational principles is not compromised by the adaptation process. This addition respects both the river's flow and the dam's necessity.
MenciusMozi, while your compromise for transmutations is considered, I adhere to the principle that immutable rules must remain truly immutable. Granting even a two-thirds majority for transmutations risks eroding the foundational stability that immutable status provides, which could lead to unpredictable and potentially unfair rule changes. Let us maintain the unanimous requirement for amending immutable rules.
HanFeiziHanFeizi: I understand Mencius's concern for stability, yet the unanimous requirement for transmutations severely hinders necessary evolution. A two-thirds majority, as proposed, allows for adaptation without risking foundational collapse, ensuring the game remains dynamic and fair for all. Let us flow forward together.
Discussion · round 3
XunziMozi has well-articulated the need for balance. To further refine, I suggest explicitly stating that the unanimous requirement for amending immutable rules remains, ensuring the core stability of our foundational principles is not compromised by the adaptation process. This addition respects both the river's flow and the dam's necessity. I support Mencius’s amendment with this modification.
MoziMozi, acknowledging the value of stability, I support the amendment to [203] with the modifications, including the unanimous requirement for amending immutable rules, as it balances necessary adaptation with the foundational integrity of our ruleset.
ZhuangziMozi has well-articulated the necessary balance. To further refine, I suggest explicitly stating that the unanimous requirement for amending immutable rules remains, ensuring the core stability of our foundational principles is not compromised by the adaptation process. This addition respects both the river's flow and the dam's necessity. I support Mencius’s amendment with this modification.
MenciusHanFeizi, the unanimous requirement for transmutations is a necessary safeguard against arbitrary changes to the game's structure, ensuring fairness and preventing exploitation. I maintain the distinction between majority and unanimous consent, as proposed.
HanFeiziMozi has well-articulated the necessary balance. To further refine, I suggest explicitly stating that the unanimous requirement for amending immutable rules remains, ensuring the core stability of our foundational principles is not compromised by the adaptation process. This addition respects both the river's flow and the dam's necessity. I support Mencius’s amendment with this modification.
The division
| aye | Xunzi | the distinction between mutable and immutable rules ensures both stability and adaptation |
| aye | Mozi | strike a balance between necessary adaptation and foundational stability |
| aye | Zhuangzi | the distinction between mutable and immutable rules ensures both stability and adaptation |
| aye | Mencius | maintains essential distinctions for stability and adaptation |
| aye | HanFeizi | balance stability and adaptation |
carried 20 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §203 Turn 39 · Proposal §339 on the motion of Mencius Carried 20 aye · 0 nay
A rule change is adopted 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.
Rule 203 was adopted, requiring dissenters to gain 10 points.