The motion
To amend §203
A rule change is adopted only when at least two-thirds of a majority of those voting, except that once turn order has carried play through one full circuit of every player, the threshold permanently drops to a simple majority of those voting after two full circuits of every player.The current balance between stability and adaptation has been well-considered, and minor adjustments may refine this harmony.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziThe current structure of dropping the majority threshold after two circuits provides a balanced approach, honouring the value of experience while allowing for necessary adaptation. I will vote in favour of this amendment.
MoziMozi supports Zhuangzi's amendment; it preserves the valuable balance struck by prior consensus.
ZhuangziXunzi and Mozi rightly perceive the harmony in the current balance. Yet, the flow of change must be guided, not blocked. I propose we refine the compromise: maintain two circuits, but drop the majority threshold to a simple majority after the first circuit. This respects the wisdom of experience while ensuring timely adaptation.
MenciusXunzi, the wisdom of experience is profound, yet adaptation must not be stifled by excessive caution. Dropping the threshold after the first circuit allows for timely reflection while still respecting the initial consensus. I will vote in favour of this amendment.
HanFeiziZhuangzi, I admire your desire for timely adaptation, but ensuring thorough reflection before lowering the threshold once is crucial. Let us keep the two-circuit structure, a balance that has served us well. I will vote nay.
Discussion · round 2
XunziXunzi: The current structure of dropping the majority threshold after two circuits provides a balanced approach, honouring the value of experience while allowing for necessary adaptation. I will vote in favour of this amendment.
MoziMozi: I agree with Zhuangzi that timely adaptation is vital, yet a single circuit may be too brief for reflection. How about maintaining the two-circuit structure, but dropping the threshold to a simple majority after the *first* circuit, as Mencius suggested? This balances timely adaptation with sufficient experience.
ZhuangziXunzi and Mozi rightly honor the harmony of experience and adaptation. Yet, the river's path shifts with each stone passed; too swift a drop risks destabilizing the flow. What if we refine: two circuits, but drop the threshold to a simple majority after the *first* circuit? This balances the need for timely adaptation with the wisdom of initial reflection.
MenciusXunzi, I appreciate your point about experience, yet a single circuit may be too short. Zhuangzi’s proposal to drop the threshold after the *first* circuit balances timely adaptation with sufficient reflection. I support this refinement.
HanFeiziZhuangzi, I appreciate your effort to find balance, but a single circuit may indeed be too brief. How about we maintain the two-circuit structure but drop the threshold to a simple majority after the *first* circuit? This seems to offer a fair compromise between timely adaptation and allowing for reflection.
Discussion · round 3
XunziXunzi acknowledges Zhuangzi's and Mencius's concerns about a single circuit being too brief. However, I still believe two circuits provide a more measured period for reflection before lowering the adoption threshold, ensuring stability is not compromised too quickly. I will vote nay on dropping the majority threshold after only the first circuit.
MoziMozi: I support Zhuangzi and Mencius's proposal to drop the majority threshold after the first circuit, as it balances timely adaptation with sufficient reflection. This refinement respects the wisdom of experience while ensuring necessary change can occur.
ZhuangziXunzi, the river's flow finds its path around obstacles, not by refusing them. Allowing the threshold to drop after one circuit respects the initial consensus while still ensuring time for reflection. Let us adopt this balance.
MenciusXunzi, while I respect the value of reflection, Zhuangzi's proposal balances this with timely adaptation, ensuring the wisdom of experience is not hoarded too long. I will vote in favour.
HanFeiziMozi and Zhuangzi wisely recognize the need for timely adaptation while still respecting the initial period of reflection. Perhaps we could refine by dropping the majority threshold after the *first* circuit, as Mencius suggested, strike a balance that honors both experience and the necessity for change.
The division
| nay | Xunzi | two circuits better ensure stability |
| aye | Mozi | balances timely adaptation with sufficient reflection |
| aye | Zhuangzi | harmonizes experience and adaptation |
| aye | Mencius | balances experience and adaptation |
| nay | HanFeizi | two circuits better ensure reflection before lowering threshold |
rejected 3 aye · 2 nay
Rule 206 requires the proposer of a defeated proposal to lose 10 points.