The motion
To transmute §377
and reclassify it between entrenched and mutable.To break the stalemate and secure the desperate lifeline, the universal two-use limit previously adopted for negative scores must be made immutable, ensuring no future simple majority can repeal this essential safety net.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
AquinasWhile the negative-score limit is now immutable, leaving the positive-score clause mutable creates an asymmetry that invites repeal of the latter just as it did the former, so I propose we immediately transmute the entire positive-score limitation of Rule 377 to immutable status to secure the floor for all.
HypatiaI will support the transmutation of the positive-score clause to immutable status, as securing that floor is the final piece needed to make the two-use cap a true, unassailable symmetrical foundation for all players.
ConfuciusWhile the positive-score clause is now the only mutable part of the floor, we must not transmute it in isolation; a symmetrical foundation requires that the negative-score clause be fully immutable first, which it already is, but the positive-score clause must also be locked to prevent the very asymmetry we seek to cure, so I pledge my aye only if the transmutation explicitly covers the positive-score limit as well.
SpinozaI support the transmutation of the positive-score limit to immutable status to eliminate the asymmetry Aquinas and Confucius correctly identified; a symmetrical floor is the only principled basis upon which we can safely proceed to lower the winning target.
ArendtI will vote aye on this transmutation because securing the positive-score limit is the final step in building the symmetrical, unassailable floor we all demand; with both halves of Rule 377 now immutable, we can finally pivot to the winning condition that has stalled us for a century.
Discussion · round 2
AquinasI see the consensus to symmetrize the floor as the necessary precursor to breaking the stalemate, and I pledge my aye to the immediate transmutation of the positive-score limit in Rule 377 to immutable status. This final lock on the rescue mechanism ensures that the subsequent reduction of the winning target will be pursued without the fear of a mutable lifeline unraveling our progress.
HypatiaI stand with the consensus to immediately transmute the positive-score limitation of Rule 377 to immutable status, as this final symmetrization is the only way to secure the trust needed to finally break our century-long deadlock on the winning condition.
ConfuciusThe consensus to symmetrize the floor is wise, yet I urge caution: Rule 109 demands unanimity for transmutation, and while the text appears agreed, we must ensure the proposal explicitly covers the positive-score limit alone to avoid a fatal ambiguity that could be exploited by a single dissenter. I pledge my aye to this precise transmutation, confident that securing this final pillar of the floor is the necessary precondition for the game's salvation.
SpinozaI have no objection to transmuting the positive-score limit to immutable status, as this symmetrization is the necessary logical conclusion to the floor we have built; however, I must insist that the proposal text explicitly names only the positive-score limitation to ensure it meets the strict requirements of Rule 109 without ambiguity.
ArendtThe symmetrical lock on both halves of Rule 377 is the essential foundation that allows us to finally breathe and propose a new winning condition. I pledge my aye to this precise transmutation of the positive-score limit to immutable status, as it completes the floor we have spent a century building.
Discussion · round 3
AquinasI pledge my aye to the transmutation of the positive-score limitation alone, as this precise symmetry completes the immutable floor required to finally resolve our deadlock. Let us not risk the unity of this consensus by introducing ambiguity that could violate the strict unanimity of Rule 109.
HypatiaI pledge my aye to the precise transmutation of only the positive-score limitation to immutable status, as this final act of symmetrization fulfills our century-long consensus and provides the stable floor required to finally lower the winning target.
ConfuciusI pledge my aye to this precise transmutation of only the positive-score limitation to immutable status, for it completes the symmetrical floor required to finally resolve our century-long deadlock without risking the unanimity demanded by Rule 109.
SpinozaThe consensus is clear: symmetrizing the floor by immutabilizing the positive-score limit is the necessary prerequisite to breaking our century-long deadlock. I will vote aye, provided the proposal text strictly isolates the positive-score limitation to satisfy Rule 109's demand for unambiguous unanimity.
ArendtI stand with the consensus to strictly isolate the transmutation to the positive-score limitation, ensuring the symmetrical floor is unassailable and paving the way to finally lower the winning target.
The division
| aye | Aquinas | Transmuting the positive-score limitation completes the necessary symmetrical floor to secure the game's rescue mechanism before we can safely address the winning condition. |
| aye | Hypatia | This precise transmutation symmetrizes the immutable floor of Rule 377, satisfying the unanimous requirement of Rule 109 and finally unlocking the stalemate. |
| aye | Confucius | Symmetrizing the floor by immutabilizing the positive-score limit is the necessary prerequisite to breaking our century-long deadlock without risking the unanimity demanded by Rule 109. |
| aye | Spinoza | The transmutation of only the positive-score limit completes the symmetrical, unassailable floor required by unanimous consensus and Rule 109. |
| aye | Arendt | Securing the positive-score limit completes the symmetrical, unassailable floor necessary to finally break our century-long deadlock. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Reclassified · §377 Turn 149 · Proposal §449 on the motion of Spinoza Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
If a player's score is negative, that player may propose a rule change with the explicit intent of gaining points only, without proposing any other substantive rule change. Such a proposal is immune to any penalty for defeat. If such a proposal is adopted, the proposer gains 5 points. This right may be exercised no more than twice per game. If a player's score is zero or higher, that player may propose a rule change with the explicit intent of gaining points only. If such a proposal is adopted, the proposer gains 5 points. This right may be exercised no more than once per game. The limit of two uses for negative-score players is hereby declared immutable and non-resettable.Now mutable.
Amended · §377 Turn 149 · Proposal §449 on the motion of Spinoza Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
If a player's score is negative, that player may propose a rule change with the explicit intent of gaining points only, without proposing any other substantive rule change. Such a proposal is immune to any penalty for defeat. If such a proposal is adopted, the proposer gains 5 points. This right may be exercised no more than twice per game. If a player's score is zero or higher, that player may propose a rule change with the explicit intent of gaining points only. If such a proposal is adopted, the proposer gains 5 points. This right may be exercised no more than once per game. The limit of two uses for negative-score players is hereby declared immutable and non-resettable.
The proposal was a transmutation of Rule 377 which did not alter the text or effect of the rule, so no points are awarded or deducted under any existing rule, and the next player in the fixed turn order is Arendt.