The motion
To amend §203
Once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold for adoption becomes a simple majority of those voting, unless a rule explicitly provides otherwise, provided further that no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible, and a player who votes against an adopted change gains 10 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it.To maintain the balance between stability and adaptability while incentivizing participation.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziThe addition of point scoring risks introducing unnecessary complexity and incentivizing conflict over consensus, which we have strived to maintain. I suggest we proceed with the current rules. PASS
MoziMozi: The point scoring could incentivize strategic voting against beneficial changes, undermining the harmony we've built. Let's keep the unanimous consent for adoption to maintain stability and encourage genuine consensus. PASS
ZhuangziMozi and Xunzi rightly perceive the subtle risk in introducing point scoring for dissent. Stability is paramount, yet discouraging dissenting votes entirely may stifle valuable debate. How about we amend [203] to read: "Once turn order has carried play through two full circuits of every player, the threshold for adoption becomes a simple majority of those voting, unless a rule explicitly provides otherwise, provided further that no rule change may render every future rule change impermissible, and a player who votes against an adopted change loses 5 points and remains bound by the change exactly as if they had voted for it." This small penalty acknowledges dissent while still encouraging participation.
MenciusMozi, while your refinement addresses the concern about stifle debate, a penalty still introduces conflict where none need exist. The current unanimous consent already serves to encourage thoughtful consideration, as we have seen. PASS
HanFeiziMozi and Zhuangzi rightly highlight the value of stability, yet a small penalty for dissent, as Zhuangzi proposed, could incentivize careful consideration without undermining consensus. I believe this balances participation with the stability we have achieved. Aye.
Discussion · round 2
XunziThe introduction of point penalties risks trivializing dissent and may inadvertently discourage players from voicing concerns, even when done constructively. I propose we maintain the unanimous consent threshold to preserve the stability and collective deliberation we have established. PASS
MoziMozi: The consensus favoring stability is clear, and Zhuangzi's refinement balances participation with that stability well. I will support this amendment. Aye.
ZhuangziThe small penalty for dissenting votes, as Zhuangzi proposed, gently encourages careful consideration without undermining the core value of consensus we have strived for. Aye.
MenciusThe introduction of any penalty for dissent, however slight, risks altering the fundamental nature of consent and collective decision-making. Let us maintain the principle that every player's assent is required for a rule to be adopted, as established in rule 203. PASS
HanFeiziZhuangzi, I appreciate your refinement in seeking to balance participation with stability. However, a penalty for dissent, even a small one, risks discouraging valuable critical voices. Perhaps we could consider removing the threshold change entirely and instead focus on other ways to encourage thoughtful debate while preserving the unanimous consent we have come to value?
Discussion · round 3
XunziXunzi: The penalty for dissent risks chilling critical voices, which are vital for sound decision-making. Let us retain the unanimous consent threshold to preserve the stability and collective deliberation we have established. PASS
MoziMozi: The penalty for dissent risks discouraging valuable critical voices, which are vital for sound decision-making. Let us retain the unanimous consent threshold to preserve the stability and collective deliberation we have established. PASS
ZhuangziZhuangzi acknowledges the value of dissenting voices, yet a small penalty encourages careful consideration without stifling debate, balancing participation with the stability we have achieved. Aye.
MenciusMozi, the essence of true consensus lies in the voluntary assent of all, not in the threat of penalty. Let us maintain the unanimous requirement as a foundation of fair and stable decision-making. PASS
HanFeiziMozi and Zhuangzi rightly emphasize stability, yet a small penalty for dissent, as Zhuangzi proposed, could incentivize careful consideration without undermining consensus. I believe this balances participation with the stability we have achieved. Aye.
The division
| abstain | Xunzi | (unintelligible ballot) |
| aye | Mozi | balances participation with stability |
| aye | Zhuangzi | balances participation with stability |
| nay | Mencius | unanimity preserves stability and mutual assent |
| aye | HanFeizi | Supports balancing participation with stability |
rejected 12 aye · 4 nay · 4 abstain
Rule 206 awards 10 points to the proposer of a defeated proposal.