Ed Murphy wrote: >>Add "All other colors are uncommon.". > >This is covered by ordinary language (*),
I wouldn't say that black is an uncommon colour IRL. It's an uncommon colour for VCs, which is what matters here, but I wouldn't want to be judging how many VCs being in circulation is the threshold between common and uncommon. >I actually thought that the palette win was inadvertently impossible, >but kept quiet about it until now. When did Gray VCs get repealed? That was one of my amendments, P5114 "tighten definition of VCs". It occurred to me when defining the palette win that if you reinserted the Gray clause (as the latest version of your "Republic of Agora" proto would) then it would make the palette win impossible. I removed the Gray bit as a cleanup because I perceived it as a spent bootstrapping clause. We really don't need a default colour, because VC gains always state the colour. Actually, it's dumb to have a default. Perhaps R2126 should explicitly say that a VC gain is invalid without a specified colour, much like its existing clause about VC spending. >On the other hand, there's nothing (except the voters' sense of good >taste) preventing a proposal from bribing supporters with six different >colors of VC, including but not limited to those defined by the rules. Indeed, but as it requires AI=2 that's quite a lot of supporters to bribe. Incidentally comex doesn't seem to have spotted that issue. I've been keeping quiet about that because I don't want to assist eir bribery attempt, but as it's come up now I may as well mention it. I wonder if e'll spot this paragraph. Anyway, if one can pass such a proposal then one can just as well bribe supporters with a win directly. -zefram
