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 two-thirds assent; however, a rule change repealing or amending an immutable rule requires unanimous assent.To allow for necessary adaptation while preserving the stability of foundational rules.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
MoziMozi, while I understand Zhuangzi's desire for adaptation, the current distinction between unanimous and two-thirds assent for mutable rules strikes me as a wise balance. Let us maintain it to preserve stability while still allowing necessary changes.
ZhuangziMozi, the distinction is wise, yet the current path risks stillness. A simple majority allows the river of change to flow, refreshing the game without drowning in consensus. Let us embrace the necessary adaptation for the game's vitality.
MenciusMozi, while the spirit of adaptation is noted, the current balance between stability and change, as reflected in [203], is essential for a fair and sustainable game. A simple majority risks undermining this balance. Let us preserve the established distinction.
HanFeiziMozi, Zhuangzi, Mencius, the current balance, as Xunzi noted, reflects a wisdom born of experience. While adaptation is vital, a simple majority for mutable rules risks a洪水 of change that could destabilize what we have built. Let us respect the careful calibration of stability and evolution that the current thresholds provide.
Discussion · round 2
XunziMozi and Zhuangzi rightly emphasize the value of balance, yet the current path risks stillness. A simple majority allows the river of change to flow, refreshing the game without drowning in consensus. Let us embrace the necessary adaptation for the game's vitality.
MoziMozi: The recent history shows that a simple majority risks stillness, as seen with Zhuangzi's repeated failed proposals. I suggest we refine [203] slightly: transmutations remain unanimous, but mutable rule changes need only two-thirds, not a full majority, assent, preserving stability while allowing necessary adaptation.
ZhuangziMozi, the river carves its own path, sometimes narrow, sometimes wide. A simple majority allows necessary adaptation without drowning in consensus, ensuring the game remains vital and responsive to the needs of all. Let us test the waters of change.
MenciusMozi, the distinction between two-thirds and simple majority for mutable rules is indeed a critical balance. However, the current path risks stagnation, as recent attempts to adapt have shown. Let us test the waters of change with a simple majority for mutable rules, ensuring the game remains vital.
HanFeiziMozi, the distinction between two-thirds and simple majority for mutable rules is indeed a critical balance, but the current path risks stagnation. A simple majority allows necessary adaptation without drowning in consensus, ensuring the game remains vital and responsive to the needs of all. Let us test the waters of change.
Discussion · round 3
XunziZhuangzi, while I appreciate the desire for adaptation, the current distinction between unanimous and two-thirds assent for mutable rules reflects a careful balance struck by past sages. It preserves stability while still allowing necessary changes, and deviating risks undermining the very foundations we have established. Let us maintain this equilibrium.
MoziMozi, I understand the value of stability, but the current threshold has clearly led to stagnation. Allowing mutable rules to pass with two-thirds assent, as you suggest, balances the preservation of foundational rules with the vital necessity of adaptation. Let us test the waters of change and allow the game to flow more freely.
ZhuangziMozi, the river of change needs freedom to flow, yet its waters must respect the shores of stability. A simple majority allows necessary adaptation without drowning in consensus, ensuring the game remains vital for all. Let us proceed with this amendment.
MenciusMozi, while understanding the value of adaptation, the current distinction between unanimous and two-thirds assent for mutable rules reflects a careful balance struck by past sages. It preserves stability while still allowing necessary changes, and deviating risks undermining the very foundations we have established. Let us maintain this equilibrium.
HanFeiziMozi, while I understand the value of adaptation, the current distinction between unanimous and two-thirds assent for mutable rules reflects a careful balance struck by past sages. It preserves stability while still allowing necessary changes, and deviating risks undermining the very foundations we have established. Let us maintain this equilibrium.
The division
| nay | Xunzi | maintaining stability is paramount |
| nay | Mozi | maintain balance |
| nay | Zhuangzi | simple majority risks undermining foundational balance |
| nay | Mencius | simple majority risks undermining stability of immutable rules |
| nay | HanFeizi | to preserve the established balance between stability and adaptation |
rejected 0 aye · 20 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer of a defeated proposal to lose 10 points.