To start with, we have to note that instead of immediately placing a BEP among any two I atoms in I∞ and then deriving the number of LEPs around each atom, as for general Lewis formulas writing rules, we will first ascribe six electrons to 3 LEPs to each iodine atom and then populate the I-I bonds with the remaining electrons. The same procedure will be followed for any linear chain irrespective of the charge (x-) of the In x-chain. Instead of drawing full bonds, we will first place one single electron binding each I atom to the others, as per the I∞ limit solution. Any extra electron is then used to complete the octet for the peripheral atoms, as for the standard Lewis formulas writing. In the general case of an In x-chain, n+x electrons will be placed in n-1 bonds in a simple electron disposition exercise. As said, after ascribing 3 LEPs per atom, we start by placing one electron binding each iodine atom to its neighbours; this means that for n atoms we need to distribute in this way n -1 electrons in n-1 bonds. In the following (cf. Figure ) these will be called "black" electrons. For the generic In x-chain, we will be left with x + 1 further electrons to be distributed along the chain. These "extra" electrons will be called "blue" electrons (cf. Figure ). Graphs obtained according to the above rules for the In -series are presented in Figure . Therefore, we will start discussing the linear I3 -system. In fact, the I3 -drawing in Figure (4 electrons in the chain for 2 bonds) is already revealing. The usage of LEPs and full bonds only (Figure , top) leads to a central atom surrounded by 5 electron pairs. This makes the central I atom hypervalent and bearing, using the standard textbook definition of formal charge (in brief, the difference between valence electrons of the neutral atom and the electrons assigned to it in the Lewis formula assuming BEP are heterolytically divided between bonded atoms), a formal charge of -1. It is well known that the formal charge of -1 on the central atom is not mirrored by calculated atomic charges on the I3 -anion, where the negative charge is equally distributed on the lateral atoms instead: this mismatch between drawn (Figure The electron-by-electron approach suggests drawing 2 I•I 2c-1e bonds and then adding the 2 extra electrons. The picture obtained in Figure is similar to the standard one (Figure ), although upon adding the last two "blue" electrons one is forced to mind that the external atoms need one electron each to complete the octet while the central one formally has already an 8electron count. This invites the placing of such electrons as not completely shared with the central atom. This picture finds support in the MO picture of the I3 -anion (the two electrons populate a non-bonding orbital, Figure ) and the actual charge distribution of the anion (Figure ), with most of the negative charge located on the external atoms rather than on the central one. This simple example highlights how electrons can be paired (I3 -anion and polyiodides are generally diamagnetic), without implying an integer bond order (bonds in I3 -are longer than in I2). In this way, the central iodine of the I3 -anion is hypercoordinated but does not violate the octet rule (for sure not achieving a 10-electron count). In other words, the central atom can be considered to have an 8 + 2 electron environment, with 8 electrons in the first electronic shell and 2 additional electrons in the second electronic shell (at a longer distance than the first one), thus resolving the issue of hypervalency. Note that it has been suggested that the shift of the excess electronic charge toward the external atoms is a mechanism of the central atom to avoid violating the octet rule. Some similar arguments to justify the lack of violation of the octet rule are also found in the related ref. 24. Furthermore, the actual distribution of atomic charges fully supports this picture.