The motion
To transmute §201
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.To allow for the potential evolution of our game while respecting the wisdom of past consensus on turn order.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziXunzi argues that the fixed turn order, affirmed by repeated unanimous consent, ensures stability and reasoned deliberation, which are essential for durable institutions. The current consensus should be respected.
MoziXunzi, I appreciate the emphasis on stability, but the current fixed turn order has demonstrably stifled rule changes, as seen in the repeated failure of amend proposals. A degree of adaptability is essential for the game's continued relevance.
ZhuangziXunzi, Mozi, the river of the game flows through the currents of both stability and adaptability. Let us honor the profound consensus for stability while also considering how the river might flow anew.
MenciusXunzi, Mozi, the unwavering consensus for fixed turn order (20-0 in Turns 7, 13, and 38) reflects a profound understanding of stability's necessity. Respecting this consensus is crucial for the integrity of our game.
HanFeiziXunzi, the profound value of stability is undeniable, yet adaptability ensures the game remains vibrant. Let’s balance these forces for a brighter future.
Discussion · round 2
XunziXunzi: The profound consensus for stability via fixed turn order reflects a commitment to reasoned deliberation and durable institutions. It is essential to honor this consensus, which has been repeatedly affirmed by all players.
MoziXunzi, Mozi, Zhuangzi, and HanFeizi, I understand the weight of the recent consensus for stability, yet the repeated failure of adaptability proposals suggests a need for reconsideration. Perhaps a compromise allowing a majority vote after the third full circuit could strike a balance, as seen in recent history where simple majority after two circuits failed to gain traction. Let us test this compromise for stability and progress.
ZhuangziXunzi, Mozi, I understand the weight of the recent consensus for stability, yet the repeated failure of adaptability proposals suggests a need for reconsideration. Perhaps a compromise allowing a majority vote after the third full circuit could strike a balance, as seen in recent history where simple majority after two circuits failed to gain traction. Let us test this compromise for stability and progress.
MenciusXunzi, Mozi, Zhuangzi, HanFeizi, the profound consensus for stability via fixed turn order reflects a commitment to reasoned deliberation and the integrity of the game. This is not a matter of mere preference but of principle; to alter this now would undermine the very foundation upon which our consensus is built. We must respect the wisdom of the past. I vote nay.
HanFeiziXunzi, the wisdom of past consensus is vital, yet adaptability prevents stagnation. Let’s test a majority vote after the third full circuit, as Mozi suggests, to balance stability with progress.
Discussion · round 3
XunziXunzi: The unwavering consensus (20-0 in Turns 7, 13, and 38) for the fixed turn order reflects a deep commitment to stability and reasoned deliberation, essential for durable institutions. This principle must be upheld. I vote nay.
MoziMozi, I concede to the weight of the unanimous consensus for stability, yet Mozi believes a slight adjustment to majority vote after three circuits could allow for necessary progress without discarding the core value of stability established in Turns 7 and 13. Let us test this compromise for a balanced future.
ZhuangziXunzi speaks of the profound wisdom of past consensus, and I respect that. Yet, the river of our game must also flow, carrying adaptability alongside stability. Let us not fear the currents of change, for they too bring wisdom. I vote aye.
MenciusXunzi, the wisdom of your arguments for stability is clear, and the consensus thus far is undeniable. However, the repeated failure to adapt, as seen with the consistent defeat of rule changes like 203, suggests our current path may be unbalanced. Perhaps allowing a majority vote after the third full circuit, as Mozi proposed, could honor the value of stability while also ensuring the game remains dynamic and responsive to the needs of the players. This compromise respects the past while opening the door to necessary change. Let us test this balance.
HanFeiziXunzi, the weight of the past is heavy, but so is the need to adapt. Allowing a majority vote after the third circuit wouldn't discard stability; it would simply acknowledge that wisdom evolves. Let’s test this compromise.
The division
| nay | Xunzi | fixed turn order ensures stability and reasoned deliberation essential for durable institutions |
| nay | Mozi | respect the profound consensus for stability |
| nay | Zhuangzi | respect the profound consensus for stability |
| nay | Mencius | Respecting the profound consensus for stability is paramount under current rules. |
| aye | HanFeizi | Balance stability with necessary adaptability for the game's evolution. |
rejected 4 aye · 16 nay
Rule 206 requires a defeated proposer to lose 10 points.