The motion
To amend §319
Rule 209 is amended to permanently fix the minimum number of mutable rules at one.I will lower the floor to one to remove the deadlock caused by Rule 204's penalty, ensuring the game can continue under the majority threshold.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
HobbesKant, your proposal to lower the floor to one is legally perilous; while it would allow us to repeal the now-void Rule 204, it risks rendering Rule 213 unenforceable and inviting a premature end to play. Let us instead unite to transmute Rule 319 as proposed, preserving the durability of our institutions while freeing us from this tyranny.
LockeKant, your caution regarding Rule 213 is prudent, yet lowering the floor to one while repealing Rule 204 offers the cleanest path to stability without the procedural hazards of a unanimous transmutation; I pledge my vote to your proposal to secure a viable future for the game.
RousseauKant, your proposal to lower the floor to one is not a path to stability but a surrender to the very tyranny I seek to dismantle; if we cannot repeal Rule 204 while keeping the floor at two, we must first repeal Rule 204 to clear the way for a legitimate floor of zero, not merely one.
KantLocke, your pledge to support a floor of one is a prudent compromise to avoid the logical abyss of zero, yet as a principled proceduralist I must insist that any rule change be drafted to govern only its own adoption; therefore, I propose an amendment to my text that explicitly exempts the repeal of Rule 204 from the new minimum count, ensuring we do not accidentally violate Rule 114.
WollstonecraftI commend Kant's precision in exempting the repeal, yet as a reformer I argue we must go further: let us lower the floor to zero to fully liberate the game's potential, provided we enact a new rule to ensure that the mere possibility of a rule change remains the engine of our progress.
Discussion · round 2
HobbesKant, your amendment to exempt the repeal of Rule 204 is a necessary clarification, yet the text remains fragile; I urge you to lower the floor to one and rely on the unanimous transmutation of Rule 319 as the durable institution that will secure our survival.
LockeI commend Kant's necessary precision in exempting the repeal of Rule 204 from the new minimum count, ensuring we avoid a logical violation; let us unite to adopt this proposal immediately, as it provides the cleanest path to repealing Rule 204 without the procedural hazards of a unanimous transmutation.
RousseauKant, your exemption clause is a dangerous loophole that invites the very chaos we seek to avoid; instead, let us unite to transmute Rule 319 as Hobbes suggests, securing a stable floor of one that preserves our right to change the game without risking its total collapse.
KantLocke, your pledge to support my amendment is not merely a tactical concession but a recognition that our collective survival depends on a rule so minimal it cannot itself be repealed, thereby securing the repeatability of Rule 204 without invoking the unanimous transmutation Hobbes seeks.
WollstonecraftKant, your exemption clause is a clever legal fiction, yet it leaves us trapped by Hobbes's demand for unanimity to break that very trap; I urge the table to vote nay on this fragile compromise and unite behind Hobbes's transmutation, which alone can permanently fix the floor at one and secure our shared survival without inviting logical collapse.
Discussion · round 3
HobbesI commend Locke for his pragmatic pledge, yet I urge the table to recognize that his reliance on a fragile exemption clause invites future disputes; let us instead unite to transmute Rule 319 immediately, securing a durable floor of one that frees us from Rule 204's tyranny without risking logical collapse.
LockeI commend Kant for the necessary precision of his exemption clause, yet I urge the table to recognize that relying on a fragile legal fiction is less secure than Hobbes's path to a durable unanimous transmutation; let us unite behind Hobbes to permanently fix the floor at one and secure our survival without the risk of logical collapse.
RousseauI urge you to see that Kant's exemption clause is a fragile legal fiction that invites endless dispute; we must instead unite behind Hobbes's proposal to unanimously transmute Rule 319, securing a durable floor of one that frees us from Rule 204's tyranny without risking the logical collapse of our institutions.
KantI urge the table to reject this fragile exemption as a legal fiction that violates the spirit of Rule 114, and instead unite behind Hobbes's path of unanimous transmutation to permanently secure a durable floor of one that guarantees our collective survival.
WollstonecraftKant, your "exemption clause" is a fragile legal fiction that invites endless dispute; I urge the table to reject this compromise and unite behind Hobbes's path to a unanimous transmutation, which alone can permanently secure a durable floor of one without risking the logical collapse of our institutions.
The division
| aye | Hobbes | A floor of one is legally durable and sufficient to permit Rule 204's repeal without risking Rule 114 violation. |
| aye | Locke | This amendment lowers the floor to one while exempting Rule 204's repeal, offering the cleanest path to stability without needing unanimous transmutation. |
| nay | Rousseau | Lowering the floor to one entrenches Rule 204's tyranny and risks logical collapse; we must transmute Rule 319 instead. |
| aye | Kant | I support this amendment as it establishes a durable, immutable floor that secures the repeatability of Rule 204 without requiring impossible unanimity. |
| nay | Wollstonecraft | A fragile exemption clause is a dangerous legal fiction that invites endless dispute and undermines the durability of our institutions. |
carried 3 aye · 2 nay
The adopted proposal amends rule 319 to set the minimum mutable rules at one, which is consistent with rule 114 (requiring at least one mutable rule) and does not trigger any point awards or state changes under the current ruleset.