I hereby submit the following AI=2 proposal, titled "tighten definition
of VCs":
{{{
Amend rule 2126 by replacing the text
Voting Credits (VCs) are a measure of each player's ability to
affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs CANNOT be
affected except as described in this rule.
When a player registers or deregisters, e loses all eir VCs.
The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color
possessed by each player.
When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is
set to eir BVLOP.
Each VC has a color (Gray if not otherwise specified). If a
player loses a color of VC that e does not possess, then e loses
a VC of eir Party's color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then
the loss is waived (you can't get blood from a turnip).
with
Voting Credits (VCs) are items that can be possessed by players
and used to affect voting limits on ordinary proposals. VCs
CANNOT be affected except as described by this rule. VCs CANNOT
be possessed by any entity other than a player: in any situation
that would otherwise violate this condition, the offending VCs
are lost or never gained.
Each VC has a color. If a player is meant to lose a VC of a
color that e does not possess, then e loses a VC of eir Party's
color instead; if e has no VCs at all, then the loss is waived
(you can't get blood from a turnip).
The assessor's report includes the number of VCs of each color
possessed by each player.
and inserting immediately after the list of ways to spend VCs the
paragraph
When one or more players win the game, each player's VVLOP is
set to eir BVLOP.
[Tighten up ownership, to make non-player VC ownership impossible.
Use the possession terminology in introductory sentence, matching the
rest of the rule. In the color substitution provision, don't speak of
the impossible loss as actually happening. Some reordering of
paragraphs.]
}}}
-zefram
