Why not just answer the question like I normally do. I am forever answering rules questions for some of the most obvious answers, yet I never come out with, "hey, buy the book." Just post the rule instead of pointing out what book to find the rule in. Is that too much to friggin' ask here? Sheesh:rolleyes:

Nevermind the fact that posting copyrighted material is definitely illegal. :rolleyes:

I'm cool with posting rules (heck, OBR rules are available on PDF), and obviously discussing these manuals is within the scope of fair use. But its unrealistic to say "I can't afford these things" and then want to have the benefit of coming on here to acquire the knowledge they provide. No different than pirating music or movies really.

Forum would be boring if nothing could be quoted, but I don't think that we should expect a total free flow of information either.

Give a man a rule.......
Teach him to find the rule......

Which helps more in the long run?

You are a good scout, son.;)

Okay, in that case, I don't want to see one more rule cited on this forum. From now on, everybody look up the answers and quit asking questions. That's the way to run a discussion forum, yeah that's the ticket. Let's just stick to watching blown umpire calls and threads about which jock itch cream works the best. That'll be an interesting forum.

Because of who asked the question, the answers were smart-mouthed. If one of the "elect" among us had asked, everyone would have been tripping all over themselves to quote every manual on the planet, but since SAUmp asked, it's time to play the "look it up in the book" card. Lame.:mad:

You reap what you sow.

So all of a sudden you want absolute uniformity in posts? Okay, I love riding my motorcycle in a manner that endagers others, I am losing weight, MLB umpires suck, I always wear a cup except when I don't....is that better?

Using extremes to argue a point is a technique best employed by those who have no point to make. Your post resembles my mother's old rationale...."And I suppose if everyone (fill in the blank), you would, too?"

I would have expected you to understand that there is a time for different learning methods.

In regards to your second paragraph, this in one of the few times I've agreed with Rich Ives.

Solid, sage advice from your elders. You should follow it.

Are you really that dense that you didn't see that I was pointing out absurdity by being intentionally absurd? I want to see rules posted, interps given when asked for, and very little "go buy yourself the book" type answers. I have plenty of the reference materials being discussed here. Evans, MLBUM, J/R, BRD, FED books, OBR books galore, Knotty Problems, 100 Problems With The Rules, etc..... But if I have a question that I'm not sure of, I don't want to be afraid to ask the question without getting a wise-a$s answer.

Can you really not read? (Oh, sorry, smart @ss response)

Please reread my post, paying attention to the portion that state: "I would have expected you to understand that there is a time for different learning methods."

This would include those to which you refer.

I expected more from you...oh, wait, another example of you being intentionally absurd. I get it.

At least you have proven me wrong on the density question!:)