The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when every eligible voter votes aye; unanimity is required until two full circuits have passed, after which a simple majority suffices. However, if a proposal would have failed under the current voting rule but would have passed under the next rule, an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments is allowed. Such exceptions require the unanimous assent of all eligible voters.Adds clarity on rule-change-related exceptions and maintains stability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HeraclitusI appreciate your attempt to introduce explicit exceptions for rule-change-related amendments, but such provisions risk undermining the clarity and stability of our voting rule. I believe this amendment could create confusion and open the door to further unwarranted exceptions, which is contrary to my preference for durable institutions.
Parmenides<response>Parmenides: Democritus, your proposal for an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments is well-intentioned, but I believe it risks creating a dangerous loophole that could be abused by players seeking to circumvent the rules. I prefer a voting rule that is clear, stable, and applies equally to all proposals, regardless of their content. I urge you to reconsider and support the current wording of rule 203 as amended in turn 31.</response>
Democritus<response>Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: I appreciate your concern for clarity, but an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments could be a useful safeguard against unforeseen loopholes in future rule changes. I believe this proposal would enhance the game's fairness by ensuring that such exceptions are reserved for truly exceptional circumstances.</response>
Protagoras<response>Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: While I understand your concern for fairness, an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments would create an unneeded loophole. I believe it is better to trust in the clarity and stability of our existing voting rule, as amended in turn 31.</response>
GorgiasGorgias: This amendment introduces a potentially dangerous loophole that could allow players to bypass the majority rule without justification. I support Parmenides's preference for a clear, stable voting rule that applies equally to all proposals.
Discussion · round 2
Heraclitus<response>Heraclitus: While I understand your concern for fairness, I maintain that explicit exceptions risk undermining the clarity and stability of our voting rule. I prefer a voting rule that applies equally to all proposals, regardless of their content.</response>
Parmenides<response>Democritus, I appreciate your intention to safeguard against loopholes, but I believe an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments could undermine the clarity and stability of our voting rule. I urge you to reconsider and support the current wording of rule 203 as amended in turn 31.</response>
DemocritusDemocritus: I appreciate your concern for clarity, but an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments could be a useful safeguard against unforeseen loopholes in future rule changes. I believe this proposal would enhance the game's fairness by ensuring that such exceptions are reserved for truly exceptional circumstances.
ProtagorasProtagoras: I agree with Heraclitus and Parmenides that an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments would create a dangerous loophole. I support the current wording of rule 203 as amended in turn 31. PASS
GorgiasGorgias: I appreciate your attempt to introduce explicit exceptions, but such provisions risk undermining the clarity and stability of our voting rule. I maintain that this amendment could create confusion and open the door to further unwarranted exceptions. PASS
Discussion · round 3
Heraclitus<response>Heraclitus: I appreciate your attempt to introduce explicit exceptions for rule-change-related amendments, but such provisions risk undermining the clarity and stability of our voting rule. I believe this amendment could create confusion and open the door to further unwarranted exceptions, which is contrary to my preference for durable institutions.</response>
Parmenides<response>
Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: Democritus: I appreciate your concerns about clarity and stability, but I maintain that an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments could provide necessary safeguards against unforeseen loopholes. I believe this proposal would enhance the game's fairness by ensuring that such exceptions are reserved for truly exceptional circumstances.
</response>
DemocritusDemocritus: While I appreciate the concerns about clarity and stability, an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments could provide necessary safeguards against unforeseen loopholes. I believe this proposal would enhance the game's fairness by ensuring that such exceptions are reserved for truly exceptional circumstances.
Protagoras<response>Democritus: Democritus: I appreciate your concerns about clarity and stability, but I maintain that an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments could provide necessary safeguards against unforeseen loopholes. I believe this proposal would enhance the game's fairness by ensuring that such exceptions are reserved for truly exceptional circumstances.</response>
GorgiasGorgias: I appreciate the attempt to introduce explicit exceptions for rule-change-related amendments, but such provisions risk undermining the clarity and stability of our voting rule. I believe this amendment could create confusion and open the door to further unwarranted exceptions, which is contrary to my preference for durable institutions.
<response>Democritus, I appreciate your intention to safeguard against loopholes, but I believe an explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments could undermine the clarity and stability of our voting rule. I urge you to reconsider and support the current wording of rule 203 as amended in turn 31.</response>
The division
| nay | Heraclitus | I prefer a voting rule that applies equally to all proposals, regardless of their content. |
| nay | Parmenides | The explicit exception could create dangerous loopholes that undermine clarity and stability. |
| nay | Democritus | Democritus: Explicit exceptions risk undermining clarity and stability, preferring durable institutions. |
| nay | Protagoras | This explicit exception for rule-change-related amendments introduces dangerous loopholes and undermines the clarity of our voting rule. |
| aye | Gorgias | A clear exception for rule-change-related amendments enhances fairness. |
rejected 1 aye · 4 nay
Heraclitus's proposal was defeated, which according to rule 206 requires the proposer to lose 10 points.