Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mbyron
How absurd. Back in post #15 of this thread, I posted both the text of the rule you cited and a casebook situation that seems to contradict your interpretation. All I asked for was an explanation of the apparent contradiction. I urge you to read it yourself.
I'm done with this thread as well. I'm disappointed with your responses, as you're ordinarily much more on point and much less ad hominem. How could I have failed to accept your explanation when you've offered none? |
Please let us know the response of your rules interpreter. Hopefully, you'll believe him.