Geoffrey Spear wrote: > The phase "whether CotC Zefram violated >Rule 1871" can only be read to mean that what is to be determined is >CotC Zefram's culpability for an alleged breach of the rules,
I strongly disagree with this assertion. The factual question of whether I violated rule 1871 is quite distinct from the legal matter of whether I am criminally culpable for doing so. How do you propose an inquiry case on the former question could have been initiated? -zefram
