From: Leonhard, Christian (Christian_Leonhard_at_ADP.com)
Date: Mon Nov 25 2002 - 10:41:23 PST
Also (when I've judged, at any rate), I've tended toward leniency in terms of searching hard for any reasonable interpretation (or re-interpretation) of the existing ruleset as necessary to render a new rule valid. Sometimes the group will interpret a rule one way, and subsequently, when a later rule seems to contradict it, realize that the prior rule could be interpreted in a different way which would still be consistent with all subsequent rules as well as the new one. Others here might disagree with this policy, though, so, again, do as thou wilt. Christian -----Original Message----- From: Leonhard, Christian [mailto:Christian_Leonhard_at_ADP.com] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 1:33 PM To: 'frc_at_trolltech.no' Subject: RE: 197:4 Don't sweat it. Ultimately, you're free to interpret things however you want and render whatever ruling you feel is appropriate. But it's easy to overlook stuff even when you're NOT a newcomer, so people will generally chime in if they think you've missed something. Worst case, a majority of members can overrule, so it's mostly self-correcting. A key thing to watch out for might be that a rule can often establish a requirement merely by stating that such a thing is true without explicitly saying "all rules must do this." At least, that's been common in my experience. Like I said, though, you're free to interpret things as you like as judge. Christian -----Original Message----- From: Nathan Russell [mailto:nrussell_at_acsu.buffalo.edu] Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 1:27 PM To: Leonhard, Christian Cc: 'frc_at_trolltech.no'; nrussell_at_cse.buffalo.edu Subject: Re: 197:4 On Mon, 25 Nov 2002 13:24:43 -0500, you wrote: >> Doesn't propose a new rule. > >This rule's requirement was meant to be implicit: that each box contain >further boxes, each with a longer name than the last. > VALID +2, sorry. I don't know HOW I keep getting so confused. Should I start just giving "preliminary rulings", and wait in case I missed soemthing really obvious? Nathan _______________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- Rule Date: 2002-11-25 18:33:27 GMT _______________________________ This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. -- Rule Date: 2002-11-25 18:41:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 24 2011 - 10:48 PST