Edit inb4 first comment

.  I don’t particularly want the first person to Orange to have so much power over the Reds.

If an Orange is deemed abusive, the demotions can be overruled and the Orange emselves may be demoted as well.

Also I smell a lot of TREASON coming from this

What have we come to? People are accusing me of treason when my proposal is nearly the same as lilomar’s word-for-word! If someone doesn’t make a fix for this soon I will do it myself.

The proposal isn’t treasonous for it’s contents.

Aww I can’t sway your sympathy? Better go commit suicide 16 times to purge myself of treason

I believe this proposal is not treasonous.  It creates a rule of unspecified (thus INFRARED) Clearance, that is the subrule of a higher-Clearance rule.

[Bucky] But “The Clearance Level of a dynastic rule is the section of the Dynastic rules which it is in.”

for the same reason as the other one, anyway.

If I had voted “-10” for the other Proposal, I would have voted “-9” here. But, still.

This proposal is a treasonous proposal, as it creates a new ultraviolet subrule.

Would place this in a weird sort of Limbo, as Bucky points out

I’m pretty sure that subrules are a part of the parent rule, thus, creating a subrule to rule X creates a subrule with the clearance of X.

Bucky this post has.already an accusation of treason

  All the above reasons, but I believe that with a little adjustment it could be acceptable. Essentially, it requires some method of power abuse prevention.
This proposal is, however, quite tasty.

Sorry, thought that this was my own prop still floating around, forgot I already Vetoed that one.