Wasn't there a fix proposal for this somewhere? I can't seem to find it. -Aris
On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 3:20 PM Kerim Aydin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 6/23/2019 3:10 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > What happens is that the proposal gets set to Power 4 when being > > resolved ("its power is set to the minimum of four and its adoption > > index", R106; it doesn't have an adoption index, so this is taking the > > minimum of the set {4}, i.e. 4). This makes it possible to get through > > arbitrarily high-powered changes with only a simple majority. > > Well, it has an adoption index of {"none"} which is different than having no > adoption index, so what's the minimum of {4,"none"}? It might be min{4,0} = > 0 if you're allowed to translate "none" to 0. > > That aside - drat that this was discovered before, I was in the process of > writing up a quick scam proposal... > > oh heck: > > I submit the following Proposal, "no power is all powerful", AI="none": > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Create the following Rule, "Supreme Power", Power=4: > > G. CAN make arbitrary changes to the gamestate by announcement. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >
