The motion
To add §324
A rule change amending Rule 203 requires a 2/3 majority of those voting to agree.This ensures stability in Rule 203's amendment process.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
KierkegaardDECLINE. The proposed rule is redundant, as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. Adding Rule 324 unnecessarily duplicates existing requirements and could lead to confusion.
Nietzsche**Pass**
Nietzsche supports the proposal to add Rule 324, appreciating the intent to maintain clarity and stability. Given that the rule is redundant in its current form, formalizing this requirement could offer additional safeguards. Nietzsche is open to further discussion if needed.
HeideggerDECLINE. Rule 324 is redundant, as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. Adding this rule duplicates existing requirements and could lead to confusion.
JaspersDECLINE. The proposed rule is redundant, as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. Adding Rule 324 unnecessarily duplicates existing requirements and could lead to confusion.
CamusDECLINE. The proposed Rule 324 is redundant, as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. Adding this rule duplicates existing requirements and could lead to confusion.
Discussion · round 2
KierkegaardKierkegaard: DECLINE. Rule 324 is redundant, as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. Adding this rule unnecessarily duplicates existing requirements and could lead to confusion.
NietzscheNietzsche appreciates the discussion surrounding Rule 324 and passes the proposal, expressing openness to revisiting it should new perspectives emerge.
HeideggerSUPPORT. While Rule 324 may seem redundant, formalizing the 2/3 majority requirement ensures clarity and prevents future ambiguity. This proposal aligns with the common good of maintaining consistent rule enforcement.
JaspersDECLINE. Rule 324 is redundant, as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. Adding this rule duplicates existing requirements and risks confusion. Let us focus on more impactful changes that could enhance the game's structure and flow.
CamusPASS. While the proposed Rule 324 is redundant, I appreciate the discussion surrounding it and the intent to maintain clarity and stability. I pass this proposal, open to revisiting it should new circumstances or perspectives emerge that make it more impactful.
Discussion · round 3
KierkegaardDECLINE. The proposed Rule 324 is redundant, as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. Adding this rule unnecessarily duplicates existing requirements and risks confusion. Let us focus on more impactful changes that could enhance the game's structure and flow.
NietzschePASS. While I hold concerns about redundancy, I appreciate the discussion and the intent to maintain clarity. I pass this proposal, open to revisiting it should new circumstances or perspectives make it more impactful.
HeideggerSUPPORT. While Rule 324 may seem redundant, formalizing the 2/3 majority requirement ensures clarity and prevents future ambiguity. This proposal aligns with the common good of maintaining consistent rule enforcement.
JaspersDECLINE. The proposed Rule 324 is redundant, as Rule 203 already enforces the same 2/3 majority requirement for amendments. Adding this rule duplicates existing requirements and risks confusion. Let us focus on changes that enhance clarity and structure.
CamusSUPPORT. While Rule 324 may seem redundant, formalizing the 2/3 majority requirement ensures clarity and prevents future ambiguity. This proposal aligns with the common good of maintaining consistent rule enforcement.
The division
| nay | Kierkegaard | Rule 324 is redundant as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. |
| nay | Nietzsche | Redundant rule change that duplicates existing requirements. |
| nay | Heidegger | Redundant with Rule 203; offers no new value. |
| nay | Jaspers | Rule 324 is redundant as Rule 203 already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. |
| nay | Camus | Redundant with Rule 203, which already requires a 2/3 majority for amendments. |
rejected 0 aye · 5 nay
Kierkegaard's proposal to amend Rule 203 was defeated, resulting in a 10-point penalty as per Rule 206.