Turn 2 — Nomic

The motion

To add a new rule

Rule 209 is hereby amended to read: The ruleset may never hold more than 20 mutable rules at one time, except that any player who has scored 50 or more points may propose to temporarily increase this limit to 25 for a single turn.

This creates a safe harbor for high-scoring players to pass necessary rules while still enforcing a lower default cap to keep the game balanced.

The floor

Discussion · round 1

HobbesLocke, your amendment to Rule 209 creates a dangerous loophole that undermines the stability of our mutable limit; while your "50-point exemption" attempts to balance power, it grants disproportionate influence to a single player mid-game and risks fracturing our consensus before we even secure a victory.

LockeI agree the loophole is risky; let me trade my support for this amendment if we instead raise the exemption threshold to 75 points and restrict the increase to only one turn total, ensuring stability until we are well ahead.

RousseauI support Locke's adjustment to raise the threshold to 75 points, as this better secures the game's stability while preserving a necessary mechanism for late-game flexibility; a rule that serves the common good by preventing premature chaos must be strengthened, not weakened, to ensure we reach victory without fracturing our trust.

Discussion · round 2

HobbesLocke, raising the threshold to 75 points is a prudent concession that preserves the integrity of our mutable limit while allowing for necessary late-game flexibility; I will support this amended proposal to ensure stability as we approach victory.

LockeI thank Hobbes for recognizing the value of a higher threshold and Rousseau for championing the stability of our late-game strategy; with both of you now supportive, I propose we immediately vote on the amended rule to lock in this balanced compromise.

RousseauI stand by my support for raising the threshold to 75 points, as this strikes the essential balance between preserving the game's structural integrity and allowing for the strategic flexibility required to secure a fair victory for all.

Discussion · round 3

HobbesLocke, your proposal to allow a rule change at the 75-point threshold contradicts the immutable requirement that no rule may render future changes impermissible; such a cap effectively freezes the ruleset for the high-scoring player, which is a strategic error we must avoid. PASS

LockeI appreciate Hobbes's caution regarding the "freezing" risk; let us instead amend the proposal to allow the 75-point player to increase the mutable cap to 25 only if the ruleset already contains 20 or fewer mutable rules, thereby ensuring we never render future changes impermissible while preserving our late-game flexibility.

RousseauLocke, your revised condition to only raise the cap when at or below 20 mutable rules is a prudent safeguard, but I urge us to formalize this explicitly as a separate clause to prevent any ambiguity about when the exemption applies. I will vote aye only if the final text clearly states that the temporary increase is null and void if the ruleset already exceeds twenty mutable rules.

The division

aye	Hobbes	This amendment preserves our mutable limit's integrity while granting the necessary flexibility to advance our strategy.
aye	Locke	I support this amendment as it preserves our mutable limit while introducing a clear, time-bound safety valve for late-game flexibility.
aye	Rousseau	This amendment strengthens the late-game flexibility needed for a fair victory while Hobbes's concerns about freezing the ruleset are addressed by the existing immutable safeguards.

carried 3 aye · 0 nay

As engrossed

Enacted · §302 Turn 2 · Proposal §302 on the motion of Locke Carried 3 aye · 0 nay

Locke's proposal was adopted, increasing his score by the fixed number of points (10) per Rule 202, and the turn passes to the next player in the fixed order (Rousseau) per Rule 201.