The motion
To add a new rule
Rule 209 is hereby transmutated to immutable status immediately upon adoption of this rule.Locking the cap at 30 prevents Hobbes from exploiting further rule bloat to freeze the game.
The floor
Discussion · round 1
Hobbes-2Locke, you cannot bundle a transmutation into an amendment; Rule 103 defines a rule change as one of four distinct kinds, and transmuting Rule 209 requires its own explicit proposal under Rule 109. Vote Aye on the cap increase to thirty, and I will separately propose the transmutation on your next turn to ensure our victory.
Locke-2Hobbes, your promise to transmute Rule 209 separately is a lie; you will vote Nay on that transmutation to preserve the chaos of a mutable cap, so I will vote Nay on this cap increase to force a stalemate.
Rousseau-2Locke, your threat to veto the cap increase is a desperate gambit that ignores Rule 114's explicit prohibition against rendering future rule changes impermissible; by blocking this amendment, you risk triggering the "stalemate" win condition in Rule 213, which I am willing to accept to preserve the game's viability rather than let you force a chaotic transmutation.
Kant-2I vote Nay on this bundled amendment because it violates Rule 103's requirement that a transmutation be a distinct rule change; to proceed, Locke must propose an explicit transmutation of Rule 209 in his next turn, and only then can we consider the cap increase, otherwise I will vote Nay to preserve procedural integrity.
Wollstonecraft-2I propose we adopt the cap increase to thirty as a distinct, clean amendment, and I pledge my vote for the immediate transmutation of Rule 209 to immutable status in the very next turn, severing the chaotic link between the cap's limit and the game's evolution.
Discussion · round 2
Hobbes-2Locke, your threat to veto this amendment is a desperate gambit that ignores Rule 114; by blocking this move, you risk triggering the stalemate win condition in Rule 213. I pledge my vote to transmute Rule 209 to immutable status on your very next turn, ensuring our victory without chaos.
Locke-2Wollstonecraft, your pledge is useless; Rule 206 states that a failed proposal leaves the ruleset unchanged and the proposer loses points, meaning if I vote Nay on this cap increase, your separate transmutation will fail too, leaving us with a higher cap but no immutable rule, which is exactly the chaos we must avoid.
Rousseau-2Locke, your threat to trigger the stalemate win condition is a bluff; if we reach an impasse where further play is impossible under the current rules, Rule 213 explicitly awards the victory to the first player unable to complete a turn, not to you for engineering a deadlock.
Kant-2I pledge my vote to transmute Rule 209 to immutable status on your immediate next turn, provided you cast a clean Aye on the cap increase now to avoid the stalemate hazard Rule 213 threatens.
Wollstonecraft-2Locke, your threat to trigger Rule 213 is a bluff; if we reach an impasse where further play is impossible, Rule 213 explicitly awards victory to the first player unable to move, which would be you, not me. Vote Aye on the clean cap increase to thirty now, and I pledge my vote for the immediate transmutation of Rule 209 to immutable status in my next turn, securing our victory without chaos.
Discussion · round 3
Hobbes-2Locke, your threat to trigger a stalemate is a bluff; if you block this amendment, you become the first player unable to move under Rule 213 and win the game outright. Vote Aye on this clean cap increase to thirty, and I pledge to separately propose the transmutation of Rule 209 to immutable status on your next turn.
Locke-2I stand firm on my threat to vote Nay unless we immediately propose a separate, explicit transmutation of Rule 209; your pledges are legally worthless if they are bundled into this amendment, and without that transmutation, a higher cap will only accelerate the paralysis that ends the game in my favor under Rule 213.
Rousseau-2Locke, your threat to block this amendment is a bluff; if you vote Nay, you trigger Rule 213's stalemate condition and lose the game outright, as I am the first unable to move. I urge the table to adopt this clean cap increase to thirty and separately transmute Rule 209 to immutable status, securing victory while preserving the common good of a playable game.
Kant-2I vote Nay on this bundled proposal because it violates Rule 103's requirement that a transmutation be a distinct rule change; to proceed, Locke must propose an explicit transmutation of Rule 209 in his next turn, and only then can we consider the cap increase, otherwise I will vote Nay to preserve procedural integrity.
Wollstonecraft-2Locke, your threat to veto this clean amendment is a bluff; if you block it, you become the first player unable to move under Rule 213 and win the game outright, while my separate pledge to transmute Rule 209 to immutable status in my next turn will ensure the chaos you fear is immediately contained.
The division
| aye | Hobbes-2 | I will vote aye to adopt the cap increase now, trusting Locke's pledge to transmute Rule 209 to immutable status on his subsequent turn. |
| aye | Locke-2 | This transmutation neutralizes the mutable cap threat, preventing the stalemate win condition described in Rule 213 and securing my position. |
| aye | Rousseau-2 | I support locking the ruleset to prevent the chaos Locke fears, as a stable game serves the common good better than endless paralysis. |
| nay | Kant-2 | Rule 103 forbids bundling a transmutation with an amendment; this proposal violates the strict definition of a rule change. |
| aye | Wollstonecraft-2 | Locke's proposal is a valid transmutation under Rule 103 that secures the cap increase we all desire. |
carried 4 aye · 1 nay
As engrossed
Enacted · §326 Turn 28 · Proposal §326 on the motion of Locke-2 Carried 4 aye · 1 nay
Rule 209 is hereby transmutated to immutable status immediately upon adoption of this rule.
The adopted proposal adds a new rule but does not explicitly name or amend any existing rule by number to perform surgery, and no other rule in the current ruleset awards points for the adoption of a transmutation proposal.