On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 8:00 PM, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 9:13 AM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: >> Gratuitous reply: >> >> I see what you're saying, and that this is generally what R1482 >> intends, but I have a hard time saying that a claim "This rule takes >> precedence over matters of X" is not a direct specification of >> a means of determining precedence. It literally and directly is. >> It specifies the means "if the matter is X, defer to this rule". >> >> Linguistically, I just don't see a dividing lines between a "claim >> of precedence" and a "specification of a means of determining >> precedence". Both can be broad or narrow, both say "x has >> precedence over y under circumstances z", I don't see that any >> particular grammar or phraseology differentiates them. > > I don't buy that. The rules are self-empowered, per R2141: "A rule is > a type of instrument with the capacity to govern the game generally." > Suppose I were to publish a document like the following:
I agree with everything that follows this paragraph, but after reading it several times I can't figure out how it has anything to do with the topic. :/
