ASA rules change process - is it broken?

[bkbjones]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Fair enough.. I did misunderstand the intent of the article as a whole. So as to the article, I change my argument to "objection, lack of foundation."

Sustained.

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by bkbjones

Sustained.

I thought you hated lawyers.... and now you ARE one! Well, a judge, anyway, which is kind of an out-to-pasture lawyer...

[Dakota]

Originally Posted by wadeintothem

Fair enough.. I did misunderstand the intent of the article as a whole. So as to the article, I change my argument to "objection, lack of foundation."

Your very thread on the topic provides foundation. Is it a change where action that previously was not interference now is? You say so. NUS says not. Therefore, either you misunderstand the change, or the NUS is recognizing what they have wrought and are trying by "clarification" to undo it. Either way, it is evidence of a rule change process that is FUBARed.

[wadeintothem]

Originally Posted by Dakota

Your very thread on the topic provides foundation. Is it a change where action that previously was not interference now is? You say so. NUS says not. Therefore, either you misunderstand the change, or the NUS is recognizing what they have wrought and are trying by "clarification" to undo it. Either way, it is evidence of a rule change process that is FUBARed.

I say it is a change BECAUSE of ASA clarifications. I don't think the clarifications are trying to undo it.

[IRISHMAFIA]

FOUNDATION! I didn't even know he was wearing make-up.