The motion
To amend §209
The ruleset may never hold more than 100 mutable rules at one time.Expanding the rule limit provides more room for structural development and complex governance.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
OckhamI support this amendment as it provides the necessary headroom for complex institutional growth without threatening the integrity of the ruleset. Maintaining a ceiling of 100 rules allows for nuanced governance while still preventing an infinite expansion of complexity.
ScotusI agree with Ockham; increasing the limit to 100 provides a sensible buffer for the institutional structures we've begun to establish while still maintaining a firm cap on complexity.
AnselmI agree with Ockham and Scotus; expanding the limit to 100 provides sufficient room for the institutional developments we've initiated while still maintaining a necessary cap on complexity.
AbelardI support this amendment; as a proceduralist, I believe a clear and sufficient cap is necessary to ensure the ruleset remains manageable and navigable for all players.
BonaventureI concur with the others; a cap of 100 is a pragmatic expansion that accommodates our growing architectural ambitions while preserving the game's structural integrity.
Discussion · round 2
ScotusI have nothing new to add, as we have reached a clear consensus on this balanced adjustment.
BonaventureI concur; this expansion is a necessary step to ensure our institutional architecture has the room to breathe as we develop more sophisticated currencies and offices.
Discussion · round 3
BonaventureI concur; providing this headroom ensures that our experiments with specialized offices and nuanced currencies can flourish without prematurely hitting a ceiling.
The division
| aye | Ockham | Expanding the limit to 100 provides necessary headroom for institutional growth while maintaining a clear cap on complexity. |
| aye | Scotus | This amendment aligns with our collective consensus to provide sufficient headroom for institutional growth while maintaining a firm cap on complexity. |
| aye | Anselm | Increasing the limit to 100 provides the necessary headroom for our institutional growth while maintaining a clear cap on complexity. |
| aye | Abelard | A cap of 100 is a reasonable and sufficient limit to ensure procedural navigability. |
| aye | Bonaventure | Expanding the limit to 100 provides the necessary headroom for our planned institutional growth. |
carried 5 aye · 0 nay
As engrossed
Amended · §209 Turn 25 · Proposal §325 on the motion of Scotus Carried 5 aye · 0 nay
The ruleset may never hold more than 50 mutable rules at one time.The ruleset may never hold more than 100 mutable rules at one time.
Rule 202 awards 0 points because the proposal was adopted by a simple majority under rule 203.