The problem with the explanation from Indianapolis is that this, despite their contention, was not a rule change in 2007.
The rule has been the same in as many FED rule books as I could go back and search through. In 2007 there was an editorial change in regards to how the rule was worded and printed, but neither the rule, nor the Case Book rulings, where changed at all.
Kind of disturbing that somebody from "the home office" doesn't know the difference between an editorial change and a rule change.
The reasoning they gave for a "false" answer to this question is, in itself, false.
|