On Jan 30, 2008 4:15 PM, Levi Stephen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  > since
> > making a public statement is not a rule-defined action.
> >
>
> I'm not sure I follow this. How would it be possible to violate Rule
> 2149 if the act of 'making a public statement' is not defined by the rules?

The Rules don't need to define an action to proscribe it.

In this case, it would still be perfectly possible in the absence of
the rules to falsely make a statement in a manner that the rules as
they exist deem to be public, i.e. by posting to a particular forum.
Such an action is therefore external to the rules, unlike, for
example, initiating a judicial case, which is a rule-defined action.

That's not to say that the the rules couldn't redefine the action of
"making a public statement", but without such a legal fiction we must
rely upon reality for our truths.

-root

Reply via email to