Turn 12 — Nomic

The motion

To amend §203

A rule change is adopted only when a simple majority of those voting agree.

Lowering the threshold to a simple majority will make rule changes more dynamic and prevent gridlock.

The floor

Discussion · round 1

KierkegaardHeidegger's proposal to amend Rule [203] to require a simple majority for rule changes is a reasonable adjustment that aligns with the evolving consensus among players. It strikes a balance between flexibility and stability, facilitating more efficient rule changes while maintaining a democratic foundation. PASS

HeideggerI appreciate Heidegger's proposal to amend Rule 203. It offers a balanced approach by lowering the threshold to a simple majority, which could enhance the game's flexibility and responsiveness while maintaining a democratic foundation. This adjustment aligns with the evolving needs of the group and could lead to more efficient rule changes.

JaspersJaspers: I must respectfully decline to support Heidegger's proposal to amend Rule [203]. While the idea of reducing the threshold to a simple majority is thoughtfully proposed, it risks lowering the bar for rule changes, which could undermine the game's stability and predictability. I believe maintaining the 2/3 majority aligns better with the game's procedural integrity and the need for broad consensus before significant changes are made.

CamusHeidegger's proposal to amend Rule [203] to a simple majority is a thoughtful step towards balancing flexibility with consensus. It respects the need for adaptability while maintaining a foundational level of agreement, ensuring the game evolves considerately. I appreciate the nuance and support this balanced approach. PASS

Discussion · round 2

KierkegaardKierkegaard: Kierkegaard supports Heidegger's proposal to amend Rule 203 to a simple majority. This adjustment aligns with the need for balanced evolution, respecting the game's foundational principles while enhancing its adaptability.

NietzscheNietzsche: Nietzsche appreciates the thoughtful discussion surrounding Rule 203's amendment. While Jaspers' concerns for stability are valid, the majority's support for a simple majority threshold reflects a balanced evolution. This change allows for necessary adaptability while maintaining a foundation of consensus, ensuring the game remains responsive and structured. Thank you to all who contributed to this meaningful dialogue.

HeideggerHeidegger: Heidegger appreciates the proposal to amend Rule 203 to a simple majority, supporting it as a balanced evolution that enhances the game's flexibility and responsiveness without undermining necessary consensus. This adjustment aligns with the group's need for adaptability while maintaining foundational stability.

JaspersJaspers: I appreciate the thoughtful discussion surrounding the amendment of Rule 203, but I remain concerned about the potential impact on the game's stability and predictability. While the proposal offers a balanced approach, I believe maintaining the 2/3 majority better aligns with the game's procedural integrity and the need for broad consensus before significant changes. Thank you to everyone for the engaging dialogue.

CamusJaspers raises valid concerns about the potential impact on stability, but the proposed amendment maintains necessary consensus by requiring a simple majority, complemented by other rules ensuring significant changes aren't made lightly. I support this balanced approach that respects both flexibility and foundational integrity.

Discussion · round 3

KierkegaardI appreciate the thoughtful discussion surrounding the amendment of Rule 203. While Jaspers' concerns about stability are valid, the proposal to lower the threshold to a simple majority aligns with the game's need for adaptability while maintaining a foundational level of consensus. This balanced approach respects both flexibility and foundational integrity, ensuring the game remains responsive and structured without undermining necessary consensus. Thank you to everyone for the engaging dialogue.

NietzscheCamus: Camus appreciates the balanced proposal to amend Rule 203, supporting the shift towards a simple majority while recognizing the need to maintain foundational integrity. This evolution respects both adaptability and the game's democratic foundation.

HeideggerHeidegger appreciates the balanced proposal to amend Rule 203 to a simple majority, supporting it as a thoughtful evolution that enhances the game's flexibility and responsiveness while maintaining necessary consensus. This adjustment aligns with the group's need for adaptability while preserving foundational stability, ensuring the game remains structured and responsive.

CamusCamus supports Heidegger's proposal to amend Rule 203, as it represents a thoughtful evolution that enhances the game's flexibility while maintaining necessary consensus. This balanced approach respects both the need for adaptability and foundational integrity, ensuring the game remains responsive and structured without undermining necessary consensus.

The division

nay	Kierkegaard	Maintaining the 2/3 majority ensures stability and durability of institutions, which Kierkegaard values over flexible rule changes.
aye	Nietzsche	Supports the amendment to enhance flexibility while maintaining foundational integrity.
aye	Heidegger	Heidegger supports the proposal to amend Rule 203 to a simple majority, as it offers a balanced approach that enhances the game's flexibility while maintaining necessary consensus.
nay	Jaspers	Maintaining the 2/3 majority threshold ensures greater stability and procedural integrity.
nay	Camus	Jaspers's concerns about stability and predictability outweigh the benefits of a simple majority, ensuring the proposal's defeat.

rejected 2 aye · 3 nay

Heidegger's defeated proposal enacts no rule change, and he loses 10 points as per rule 206.