re(ui): re-establish selective activation by killing the alternative statically

Last iteration I withdrew "a bundle is a palette" because the evidence
did not choose between selective activation within one bundle and two
compositions shown in sequence. The alternative can be killed from the
disc, which I had not tried.

Hypothesis 2 needs a bundle declaring the GLOWS WITHOUT THE LOGOS. There
is none. Every GP_TITLE entry carrying palogo elements:

  10, 13 (publisher twins)  palogo_eff0.prm, palogo_sqex, palogo_sqex_eff
  11, 14 (developer twins)  palogo_eff0.prm + all three logos + all three glows

Four entries, and each developer entry declares the complete set of six.
So whichever bundle was active across frames 94-211 -- entry 11, entry
14, or both in turn -- it declared the logos and the glows, while the
game drew two sprites at a time in disjoint phases.

Therefore only a subset of a bundle's elements is drawn at any moment,
whatever the bundle-loading story is. The conclusion no longer depends on
resolving how many bundles are involved, which is why the texture-base
test's failure stopped mattering.

So the claim is reinstated -- this time by eliminating the alternative
rather than by assuming it away. What worked was not a better capture but
asking what the competing hypothesis would REQUIRE on the disc and
finding it absent.

METHOD: a hypothesis that predicts an artefact can be killed by looking
for the artefact, which is often far cheaper than measuring the behaviour.

docs/port/HANDOFF.md

@@ -360,13 +360,15 @@ authored version can be deleted.
   **zero** contain both a glow and a logo; the switch is one clean boundary with
   two sprites either side.
   🔴 **And it goes further than start times — a bundle's declared elements are
-  not what gets drawn.** ⚠️ I previously called this "a bundle is a palette,
-  selectively activated"; **the mechanism is withdrawn** — the evidence does not
-  choose between "one bundle, selective activation" and "two compositions shown
-  in sequence". The texture-base test that looked like it would separate them
-  fails its own control: the publisher splash is a different bundle and uses the
-  same base `0x11C30000`, so that address is a reused upload slot, not an
-  identity. The consequence for you is unchanged; the reason is not established. Entry 11 declares *three* logo/glow pairs; only two are ever drawn.
+  not what gets drawn.** ✅ **And the mechanism is now established, by
+  elimination.** The competing story — "two compositions shown in sequence" —
+  needs a bundle declaring the glows *without* the logos, and no such bundle
+  exists: only four entries in `GP_TITLE` carry `palogo` elements, and each
+  developer entry (11, 14) declares **all six** logos and glows. So whichever
+  bundle was active, only a subset of its elements was drawn at a time.
+  (An earlier texture-base test could not separate the two — it failed its own
+  control, since the publisher splash is a different bundle and shares the base
+  `0x11C30000`, a reused upload slot rather than an identity.) Entry 11 declares *three* logo/glow pairs; only two are ever drawn.
   `palogo_anima` gets **0 frames** while `palogo_gamearts` gets **95**, from
   byte-identical keyframe times. (Reach: the capture covers frames 1–214, so
   "never in the window".) **Compositing every element of a bundle does not