New "AP Legal Touch" Rule/Different Interpretation

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Old School

I'm beginning to see the problem here. You guys and the rulemakers are caught up on the wording here, no you are twisted up on the wording.

Of course we're caught up in the wording! The wording is the essence of the rule. That's the point to this whole debate, confusion and difficulty. It's not that "we are twisted up on the wording" that's the problem. It's that the wording is not yet the best possible to convey the idea desired. We can't follow "the spirit of the rules" if we don't understand from the words which are used to convey the spirit of the rules. This is not a problem of "rule book officials" or "anal retentive lawyers" being obnoxcious jerks. It's a problem of using words well to properly convey thoughts.