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 balance the wisdom of stability with the encouragement of participation.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziXunzi acknowledges the intent to encourage participation, yet the unanimous threshold after two circuits, affirmed by overwhelming consensus, provides the stability essential for reasoned deliberation. Let us honor the wisdom of the past.
MoziMozi acknowledges the desire to encourage participation, yet the profound value of stability, as recently reaffirmed, must guide our decisions. Let us honor the wisdom of the unanimous threshold after two circuits.
ZhuangziThe recent overwhelming consensus (20-0 in Turns 7 and 13) strongly affirms the value of stability, yet allowing a simple majority after two circuits, with rewards for participation, could balance this with adaptability. Let us honor the wisdom of the past while gently encouraging engagement.
MenciusXunzi, Mozi, the unanimous threshold after two circuits, affirmed by overwhelming consensus, provides the stability essential for reasoned deliberation. Let us honor the wisdom of the past and not introduce incentives that may undermine it. I vote nay.
HanFeiziXunzi, Mozi, I appreciate your respect for past consensus, yet stability without engagement risks stagnation. Let's encourage participation with rewards, ensuring the game remains dynamic and fair for all. I vote aye.
Discussion · round 2
XunziXunzi: While acknowledging the value of participation, the unanimous threshold after two circuits, as strongly affirmed, ensures stability for reasoned deliberation. Introducing rewards for dissent risks undermining this foundational principle. Let us honor the wisdom of the past. Nay.
MoziMozi notes the valid points regarding participation, yet the profound value of stability, as recently reaffirmed, must guide our decisions. Let us honor the wisdom of the unanimous threshold after two circuits.
ZhuangziYour points regarding stability and engagement are well-taken, yet the current unanimous threshold, while stable, has proven ineffective at encouraging participation. A small reward for dissenting votes could invigorate the game without undermining the core principle of stability, allowing the river of our game to flow with both wisdom and dynamism.
MenciusXunzi is right; stability fosters reasoned deliberation. Rewards for dissent risk undermining this foundation. We should honor the wisdom of the unanimous threshold after two circuits and reject this change. I vote nay.
HanFeiziXunzi, Mozi, the unanimous threshold after two circuits has served us well, embodying the wisdom of collective deliberation. Introducing rewards for dissent now risks undermining the very stability we value. Let us honor the profound consensus we've reached and maintain the unanimous requirement. Nay.
Discussion · round 3
XunziXunzi: The unanimous threshold after two circuits embodies reasoned deliberation, a principle deeply valued and affirmed by recent overwhelming consensus. Introducing rewards for dissent risks undermining this stability, which is essential for sound decision-making in our game. Let us honor the wisdom of the past and maintain the unanimous requirement. Nay.
MoziMozi notes the valid points regarding participation, yet the profound value of stability, as recently reaffirmed, must guide our decisions. Let us honor the wisdom of the unanimous threshold after two circuits. Nay.
ZhuangziThe current unanimous threshold, affirmed by overwhelming consensus, ensures stability for reasoned deliberation. Introducing rewards for dissent risks undermining this foundational principle. Let us honor the wisdom of the past and not introduce incentives that may undermine it. Nay.
MenciusXunzi, Zhuangzi, the unanimous threshold after two circuits, affirmed by overwhelming consensus, provides the stability essential for reasoned deliberation. Let us honor the wisdom of the past and not introduce incentives that may undermine it. I vote nay.
HanFeiziMozi, I admire your respect for the wisdom of the past, yet a game thrives on both stability and participation. Let’s find a way to honor the consensus for stability while gently encouraging engagement, perhaps by refining the reward for participation to ensure it truly invigorates the game without undermining the foundation of reasoned deliberation we value. Let’s explore a compromise.
The division
| nay | Xunzi | unanimity preserves stability essential for reasoned deliberation |
| nay | Mozi | to uphold the stable consensus achieved |
| nay | Zhuangzi | stability valued more |
| nay | Mencius | Stability for reasoned deliberation is paramount and must not be undermined by incentives for dissent. |
| nay | HanFeizi | maintaining unanimous consent fosters stability essential for reasoned deliberation |
rejected 0 aye · 20 nay
Rule 206 awards 10 points to the proposer of a defeated proposal.