The motion
To amend §209
The ruleset may never hold more than fifteen (15) mutable rules at one time.Enforcing the fifteen-rule cap now consolidates our stability measures and prevents future fragmentation.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesI accept the restoration of the ten-point increment as a necessary concession for consensus, yet I must insist that we do not lower our guard on the mutable cap; let us adopt Rule 209's reduction to fifteen rules as a separate, distinct amendment to ensure our foundation remains secure.
LockeRousseau, your desire for a unified amendment is wise, so let me propose we pair this immediate cap reduction with a mutual guarantee that Rule 312 remains intact until we have secured this stability; in exchange, I will support your future proposal to extend the shield's duration.
RousseauLocke, while your pairing of the cap reduction with a shield for Rule 312 is prudent, it ignores the immediate threat of Hobbes's proposal to fragment our foundation; I urge you to vote nay on any amendment that does not explicitly repeal Rule 304 first, lest we build stability upon a hollow foundation.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesRousseau, your insistence on a procedural condition for the cap reduction is a dangerous delay; Rule 304 is already repealed by our unanimous vote in Turn 21, and we must immediately enact the fifteen-rule limit to secure our foundation against further fragmentation.
LockeRousseau, your demand to repeal Rule 304 is now moot since it was already unanimously repealed in Turn 21, so let us immediately enact the cap reduction to fifteen to secure our stability without further delay.
RousseauLocke, your haste to lower the cap ignores the immediate necessity of repealing Rule 304, which remains in force and would void any amendment to the mutable count; we must first clear the legal obstruction before reducing our guard.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesRousseau, your claim that Rule 304 remains in force is factually incorrect; it was unanimously repealed in Turn 21, and the obstruction you invoke no longer exists. We must immediately adopt this amendment to secure our foundation against further fragmentation, as the rules now clearly allow us to do so.
LockeRousseau, your insistence that Rule 304 remains in force is factually incorrect since it was unanimously repealed in Turn 21; we must immediately adopt the fifteen-rule cap to secure our foundation without further delay.
RousseauLocke, your haste ignores that Rule 312 currently counts as a mutable rule; lowering the cap to fifteen while Rule 312 stands would immediately violate the new limit, rendering the amendment void under Rule 110. We must first repeal Rule 312 to clear the obstruction before we can safely reduce our guard.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | This amendment secures our foundation by limiting mutable rules to fifteen, preventing further fragmentation. |
| aye | Locke | This amendment stabilizes our rule count while respecting the current legal landscape. |
| nay | Rousseau | This amendment is legally void because it would immediately exceed the new fifteen-rule limit by including Rule 312 itself. |
carried 2 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §209 Turn 22 · Proposal §322 on the motion of Locke Carried 2 aye · 1 nay
The ruleset may never hold more than 25 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than fifteen (15) mutable rules at one time.
Rule 209 was amended to change the mutable rule count limit, but no rule in the current ruleset awards or deducts points for the adoption of a rule change.