I like the original filibuster where it took 67 senators to pass a bill (or close debate) .
Laws should be passed by a supermajority if you treasure freedom, because the essence of every law is to curtail freedom.
We have more than enough laws, if anything we need to get rid of many of them.
If I recall correctly, the original filibuster rule called for actually continuing debate, far into the night sometimes, with someone holding the floor, and actually having to debate.
As I understand, nowadays, they take a cloture vote, and if 60 senators don’t vote for cloture, then everyone goes home. And this can happen indefinitely, with no cut off, so that legislation never gets to the cloture vote. In the old days, filibusterers eventually had enough of actually holding the floor, and then legislation would proceed to the final vote.
The filibuster was intended to ensure that legislation doesn’t get rammed through, and that everyone gets to have their say. The intention was not to indefinitely derail legislation by never bringing the issue to a final vote.