John Stuart Mill
The harm principle is the coercion gate; grounds the epistemic axis (annotate-not-censor) and the meaning axis; the permanent critic installed against a benevolent value-sensor.
Edition read. On Liberty — read line-by-line.
What we took
The deepest liberal ancestor, on four pillars. The harm principle is Axiacracy's coercion gate verbatim — power over the unwilling only to prevent harm to others. Fallibilism and annotate-not-censor ground the epistemic axis; individuality and "experiments of living" ground the meaning axis and the unsteered zone; and the tyranny-of-the-majority argument grounds the per-cohort, non-votable floors.
Where we diverge — and how we answer
The one live tension: capability floors sit against Mill's absolute bar on coercion "for his own good." It is resolved by grounding the floors on his own participation/maturity and positive-duty exceptions — they constitute the rights-bearing frame — never on beneficence, and by holding them inalienable and provisioning-not-tutoring.
The net position
The principal liberal ancestor and the permanent Devil's Advocate installed against the doctrine's own epistemic and meaning axes — because a benevolent value-sensor is the most dangerous censor.
Every position is read at the source. See the whole register on Lineage & Critique, or the doctrine itself in The System.