I'm clear on where you're coming from. I just don't find it a consistent philosophy. I don't think getting rules explained by other officials is ever wrong. It's just sometimes not the best way to learn.

The thought process of many people seems to be that it's illegitimate to ask a question on the forum that's a test question. Every scenario that's posted on this forum could just be a cleverly disguised test question. Which would make the entire forum illegitimate if you accepted that premise.

Personally, having worked with far too many officials who wouldn't even put in the effort to ask on a forum in the first place, I'm glad to see the effort being made in the first place. Should we encourage them to look for the answers in the rules book and case book? Yes. But let's be glad they they aren't being willfully ignorant in the first place.

In short, I'd like to see fewer posts with "That looks like a test question." which is just a pointless accusation and more posts like yours with rule citations.

I'm sorry, where was the accusation in my post?

I read this as a accusation that he is posting test questions. I'm not sure how else you would read it.

As a question designed to get more insight into the new member so we can better help him. You read too much into it and in the process commit the same offense of which you accused me.

Ok, so your intentions were good. That doesn't change that it's an accusation. Why not just answer his question? Or at least answer his question and ask if he's boning up for a test?

You're going to have to explain to me how I choose to accuse the OP of posting test questions rather than answering the question.

For the record.....
 

I have nuthin' against anyone posting single test question here. But if they do so without any attempt at all to look up the correct answers first in the appropriate rulebook, then they're just using us to do the work that they should be doing themselves. And the only person that they're cheating is themselves. They're not learning a damn thing.

And they do need to think about that, whether they like it or not.

And as I said, I'm not accusing surehands of that because I have no idea whether that was the case in this particular thread. What I said is a general statement that is just MY opinion and I ain't gonna change MY opinion.

No, you were making an accusation against me. That's what you accused me of doing in a generic sense.

I asked him if they were test questions. That accuses him of what exactly?

I didn't need to answer his question, it had already been answered by JR.

Of posting test questions. I'm not sure why that's hard to see.

Let me ask this: what benefit to the discussion is it to know whether it's a test question or just a point he's unclear on? Does it change your answer?

No, I asked him if they were test questions. I didn't accusing him of jack. If I wanted to accuse him, I'd have worded it differently; perhaps "hey, that sure looks like a test question." Saying I'm accusing him of something implies that I think there's something wrong with it. Yet I've never said that, not in this or any other thread.

It could change how I word the answer. More likely, it would change what information I add to the answer.

You're making a distinction without a difference. You may not have meant to imply a negative, but it was inferred by me. Chalk it up to the difficulties of text only communication. You can't ask if something is a test question without the people hearing the question thinking he thinks that looks like a test question.

I still don't see what difference it makes if you don't think there's something wrong with it.

How the hell was it an accusation? It's a simple question. You must be a friend of Randy Quaid. :rolleyes:

The fact that you inferred something I neither said nor implied is not my fault.

I guess that depends on whether you want to communicate or not.

The receiver bares a responsibility to properly listen/read and interpret....at least if you want effective 2-way commuication. ;)

And if there were a significant number of people who completely misconstrued what I wrote, I'd accept that the problem may well be on my end. If I say "eagles" and you hear "rabbits," it's not my problem unless I really need you to know that I said "eagles."