Vote-Ready Whiteboards — Day 0 Assembly

Whiteboard 1 — left of library entrance

PROPOSITION 1: EXPLORATION

"Should we send organized scouts beyond campus?"

A YES — EXPLORE

→ Day 1 departure
→ Armed escort, small team
→ Detailed brief clipped →

B NO — WAIT

→ Observe 3–5 days first
→ Build defenses, gather intel passively
→ Detailed brief clipped →

C STAGED COMPROMISE

→ Day 1: drones/rooftop only. Day 2-3: armed scout. Day 4+: expand.
Added by Jason Li (李俊豪) — see clipped detail

YES OR NO? (reworded to neutral framing)

KEY DATA: ~10-13 days food. Captain Wu patrol returned safely from 5km.

VOTE METHOD: Show of hands or ballot — TBD at assembly

A Arguments FOR Immediate Exploration

Food math is unforgiving. Current stores last 10–13 days. Every day idle burns irreplaceable calories. Scouting on Day 1 costs almost nothing; waiting costs food we don't have.
Captain Wu's patrol returned safely. Armed team, several hours, 5km radius. No threats. The immediate perimeter is not actively hostile. That's data.
Risk asymmetry favors action. Explore and find nothing = one day lost. Wait and food runs out = everyone dies. The downside of inaction is worse.
Can't see past the tree line from campus. "Waiting to observe" means observing the same empty view. The only way to get information is to go look.
We're already visible. 2,400 people arrived with a flash of light. If something is watching, it already knows we're here. NOT sending scouts doesn't make us invisible.

Champions: Martin Li (李明远), Wilson Wang (王立新), Harrison Hao (郝俊杰)

B Arguments FOR Waiting (3–5 Days)

Unknown force brought us here. Whatever displaced 2,400 people could still be active. Sending people out blind is gambling lives against zero information.
One patrol proves nothing. Captain Wu went 5km in daylight, one direction. That says nothing about 10km, 50km, or nighttime. Sample size: meaningless.
12 days is not zero. Use 3–5 days to observe weather, animal cycles, horizon signals. Then send scouts with actual intelligence.
Risk is irreversible. Lost scouts can't be recovered. No hospital, no rescue capability. Every person sent out may not come back.
"Changed/replaced" concern. Scouts could be compromised by unknown means. No screening protocol exists. Once exposed, can't take it back.

Champions: Grace Su (苏悦敏), Paul Liang (梁平之)

C Staged Compromise (Jason Li)

Half-sheet, added during dinner discussion.

Day 1: Drone recon only (if functional), rooftop observation with binoculars. No personnel leave perimeter.
Day 2–3: Small armed scout (4–6 people), 5–10km. Mandatory check-in. Return before dark.
Day 4+: Expand based on findings. Larger parties if safe.
Defense runs parallel regardless. Fortification, watches, guard rotation don't wait for exploration results.

— Jason Li (李俊豪)

D Walter Wu Patrol Summary

Category	Finding
Terrain	Dense forest N (~50-100m from library). Grassland S/E/W. Flat coastal lowland.
Wildlife	Zebra (15-20), antelope (30+), wild cattle (8-10). Birds numerous. No large predator sign.
Water	Two lakes: "Alpha" ~3km E (large), "Beta" ~2km W (small). Freshwater appearance. UNTESTED.
Structures	NONE. No roads, fences, foundations, debris. No smoke, lights, aircraft.
Humans	No sign within 5km in any direction.
Assessment	Wildlife, vegetation, latitude consistent with eastern coast of southern Africa.

Compiled from Captain Wu's verbal report. Reviewed and approved by Walter Wu.

E Information Team Statement

The information team takes no position on any proposition. We present the arguments; you decide.

Anyone may submit corrections or additional arguments. Verified items will be added.

— Lucas Lu (陆青山)

Whiteboard 2 — center, beside speaker position

PROPOSITION 2: FOOD & RESOURCES

2A: Ration food now?

YES — mandatory rationing immediately

NO — voluntary conservation, revisit in 48hrs

(See clipped projections →)

2B: Who controls distribution?

Wilson Wang (王立新) team (current)

Elected committee

Leadership designates

Audit mechanism required — Timothy Liu

2C: Exploration finds — individual or collective?

All collective

Finder's share (%)

Defer decision

mandatory sharing

A Rationing Projections

Scenario	Daily kcal/person	Days remaining
Normal (no control)	~2,000	7–8
Light rationing	~1,500	10–11
Strict rationing	~1,200	12–14
Emergency (subsistence)	~800	16–18

Assumes ~2,000 people, current cafeteria stocks + shop + voluntary personal contributions.

Martin Zhao: Perishables must be eaten within 48–72 hours regardless. Refrigeration depends on generator fuel. Eat fresh now; save dry goods.

Compiled by: Wilson Wang logistics team + Martin Zhao

B Inventory Summary (condensed)

Category	Quantity	Notes
Rice (uncooked)	~2,570 kg	Dry storage, long shelf
Flour	~1,930 kg	Dry storage
Meat (frozen)	~3,860 kg	Freezer — diesel dependent
Vegetables	~5,150 kg	Leafy = 2-3 days
Prepared food	~1,800 kg	EAT FIRST
Bottled water	~2,700 L	~1.3L per person = 1 day

Instant noodle count disputed — recheck underway. Full manifest filed separately.

— Wilson Wang (王立新)

C Emily's Note on Question 2C

Table the finder's-share question until resources are actually found. Debating the split before there's anything to split will generate faction lines over a hypothetical.

Recommend: vote "Defer" and revisit when exploration teams have findings to report.

— Emily

Whiteboard 3 — right side, near exit corridor

PROPOSITION 3: HOW WE ORGANIZE

3A: Leadership structure?

Michael Li (李伟) continues coordinating

Elected council

Department-based system

No leader — assembly votes on all

3B: Armed personnel — who directs?

Michael Li (current)

Elected security committee

Military chain of command

⚠ Do NOT discuss arms details publicly

3C: Decision method?

Direct assembly vote

Representative delegates

Leader decides after consulting

→ Default for tomorrow: Ahmed's format
(group discussion AM → vote PM)

A Michael Li's Statement

Confirmed at assembly: Michael Li has explicitly declined any permanent authority role.

Paraphrased: "I've been coordinating because someone had to. That doesn't make me qualified to lead. If you want me to keep coordinating until we vote on a structure, fine. But I am not your president, general, or dictator. Decide what you want."

— Assembly note-takers

B Walter Wu: Arms Security

REQUEST: Do not discuss specific number, type, or location of weapons in open assembly.

If observed, broadcasting our arsenal is a tactical error.
Announcing gun counts creates temptation for individuals to secure weapons.
Assembly can vote on WHO controls arms without knowing exact inventory.

— Walter Wu (吴天明), via Michael Li

? Late-Night Addition (unsigned)

REMINDER:

None of these votes are binding. No constitution. No enforcement. If 51% vote explore and 49% refuse — what happens? If the elected council decides something people reject, who enforces it?

We are building legitimacy from nothing. The only thing backing these votes is mutual agreement to abide. What happens when someone simply... doesn't comply?

[Found clipped late evening. Handwriting unidentified. Torn half-sheet.]