The motion
To amend §203
Once turn order has carried play through three full circuits of every player, the threshold for adoption becomes a simple majority of those voting, unless a rule explicitly provides otherwise.Builds on recent consensus for majority adoption while giving more turns for stability.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
XunziMozi, while I understand the desire for adaptability, extending the threshold to three circuits risks further destabilizing the consensus-building process that recent changes have sought to establish.
MoziMozi: I appreciate Xunzi's concern, but a three-circuit threshold still allows flexibility while giving players time to develop strategies, balancing adaptability with stability.
ZhuangziXunzi, the current balance struck by two circuits serves the common good, providing a stable foundation for strategy while allowing for necessary adaptation. Extending this further risks disrupting the nascent strategies players have begun to establish.
MenciusXunzi is correct; further delay risks disrupting the nascent strategies we have begun to establish. The two-circuit balance already provides necessary adaptability without sacrificing foundational stability. I propose we uphold the current threshold.
HanFeiziMozi, while I respect the call for balance, Zhuangzi and Mencius rightly point out the risk of disrupting early strategies. Let's not overcomplicate the adaptation process; two circuits already offer a fair degree of flexibility without unduly delaying consensus.
Discussion · round 2
XunziMozi, while I acknowledge the intent to balance adaptability with stability, the recent failures to alter the threshold demonstrate a consensus favoring stability at this stage. Extending to three circuits risks undermining the nascent strategies we have begun to establish.
MoziMozi: I yield to Xunzi and Zhuangzi's points; stability is paramount now. How about amending [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, but only after four more full circuits have passed"? This retains the current threshold for now while setting a later, clearer point for potential change.
ZhuangziMozi, I appreciate your willingness to reconsider. However, adding further conditions only complicates the rules needlessly. Let us stick to the two-circuit balance, which already serves the common good well by providing stability without unduly hindering strategy.
MenciusXunzi is right; stability must be prioritized now. I support Mencius's proposal to uphold the two-circuit threshold.
HanFeiziMozi, while I understand the desire for future adaptability, Zhuangzi and Mencius rightly emphasize the need for stability now. Let's not disrupt the nascent strategies. Two circuits offer a fair balance. I propose we uphold the current threshold.
Discussion · round 3
XunziMozi, while your modification introduces a later change point, it adds unnecessary complexity and delay, undermining the current stability we have established. Upholding the two-circuit threshold remains the wisest course.
MoziMozi: Understanding the concern for stability, perhaps we could 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, but only if a proposal to change the threshold is made after five more full circuits have passed." This retains the current unanimous consent for now while setting a later, clearer point for potential change, balancing stability and future adaptability.
ZhuangziMozi, the path of gradual change you propose risks creating confusion and uncertainty that may hinder strategic planning. The current two-circuit threshold provides a clear and stable foundation for our ongoing play. I suggest we retain the status quo to ensure predictability and allow our nascent strategies to develop further.
MenciusXunzi is correct; stability must be prioritized now. I support Mencius's proposal to uphold the two-circuit threshold.
HanFeiziHanFeizi: Mozi, I appreciate the effort to seek a balanced approach, but the recent votes clearly favor stability for now. Let's respect the current consensus and uphold the two-circuit threshold to allow our nascent strategies to develop without further disruption. I propose we stick with the current rule [203] as is.
The division
| nay | Xunzi | preserves stability for strategy development |
| nay | Mozi | Upholding stability is crucial now. |
| abstain | Zhuangzi | (unintelligible ballot) |
| abstain | Mencius | (unintelligible ballot) |
| nay | HanFeizi | stability crucial now |
rejected 0 aye · 12 nay · 8 abstain
Rule 206 awards 10 points to the proposer of a defeated proposal.