On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 3:06 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <Warrigal> When did this start meaning that SHOULD produces an obligation? > > It's a lowercase should, which I can't really read as anything but an > obligation in this context; it's an obligation to understand the full > implications of what you're doing, or else not do it. How else would > you interpret MMI?
If I say to a friend, "You should buy XYZ", it doesn't mean that he's obligated or even requested to buy XYZ; it's just a recommendation. A SHOULD in the rules should therefore also be a recommendation, and like breaking a SHALL is a reason for criminal punishment that must be applied, breaking a SHOULD can be a reason for informal "punishment" that people can apply at their discretion, such as failing to be re-elected. --Warrigal of Escher
