Motion for debate

[Rulesman]

This house agrees that threads that present issues that have not been directly addressed by the Rules or Decisions are more interesting than questions that can be answered by checking in the books.

[DaveP043]

1 hour ago, Rulesman said:

This house agrees that threads that present issues that have not been directly addressed by the Rules or Decisions are more interesting than questions that can be answered by checking in the books.

Agreed, certainly more interesting, also more prone to produce heated (occasionally TOO heated) debate.  Rules-related threads that have definitive answers are useful too, they encourage people like me to go to the resources to research the rules and decisions, to become more familiar with them.  Presumably, I'm not the only one that learns from both kinds of discussions.

Would you want a poll on top of this thread?

[iacas]

What's the point of this topic?

People will post what they want. If they're lazy, they'll post a simple rules question with a definitive answer. If they're rules geeks like us, or they encounter an odd situation, they'll occasionally post a more interesting one.

[Zeph]

Is this a question or what are we going to discuss here?

[The Hook Meister]

The point of this topic is? Damn if I know. This almost sounds like what came first the chicken ore the egg type discussion.

[Rulesman]

3 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

Agreed, certainly more interesting, also more prone to produce heated (occasionally TOO heated) debate.  Rules-related threads that have definitive answers are useful too, they encourage people like me to go to the resources to research the rules and decisions, to become more familiar with them.  Presumably, I'm not the only one that learns from both kinds of discussions.

Would you want a poll on top of this thread?

Thanks Dave

I agree that this sort of forum provides a service for all shades of user. Often the 'definitive' answers help me remember a detail I might have forgotten.

But this is one of only a few sites where the unanswered issue produces some interesting(!) responses and often new or unpublicised information.

I would find a forum that simply had responses like "the answer is Dec xyx" or "the RBs have not published a ruling for that situation" very boring.

The point of the topic was to elicit other views.

 

 

[iacas]

6 minutes ago, Rulesman said:

The point of the topic was to elicit other views.

Other views on what?

I'm with @Zeph and @The Hook Meister in not understanding the point of this topic.

[Rulesman]

5 hours ago, Rulesman said:

that threads that present issues that have not been directly addressed by the Rules or Decisions are more interesting than questions that can be answered by checking in the books.

Responses could be: Yes, No. It depends ........ I have no view. Or .......... 

As DeveP suggested , it could have been a poll but that would have precluded any sort of debate.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Rulesman

[iacas]

28 minutes ago, Rulesman said:

Responses could be: Yes, No. It depends ........ I have no view. Or .......... 

As DeveP suggested , it could have been a poll but that would have precluded any sort of debate.

I still don't understand, unless you're asking whether we agree with something that I'd consider blindingly obvious.

Yes, those topics are more interesting… but duh…? And so what?

[Rulesman]

Others may not agree.

Edited April 5, 2018 by Rulesman

[AlDena]

6 hours ago, The Hook Meister said:

The point of this topic is? Damn if I know. This almost sounds like what came first the chicken ore the egg type discussion.

That's easy. Since eggs are for breakfast and chicken is for dinner, eggs came first. Oh wait, I forgot about Chick-Fil-A.

[Asheville]

On 4/5/2018 at 9:43 AM, DaveP043 said:

Agreed, certainly more interesting, also more prone to produce heated (occasionally TOO heated) debate.  Rules-related threads that have definitive answers are useful too, they encourage people like me to go to the resources to research the rules and decisions, to become more familiar with them.  Presumably, I'm not the only one that learns from both kinds of discussions.

Would you want a poll on top of this thread?

I'm with DaveP. For those of us who spend twelve-hour days outdoors sporting a badge and a radio, it's not what we know so much as what we can prove. I generally enjoy searching for answers here in the comfort of my desk chair.

[Patch]

On 4/5/2018 at 8:09 AM, The Hook Meister said:

The point of this topic is? Damn if I know. This almost sounds like what came first the chicken ore the egg type discussion.

The egg. It's been proven. 😁

[Vinsk]

13 posts ( now 14) and I have no idea what the thread is about.

[dennyjones]

15

[Fourputt]

1 hour ago, Asheville said:

I'm with DaveP. For those of us who spend twelve-hour days outdoors sporting a badge and a radio, it's not what we know so much as what we can prove. I generally enjoy searching for answers here in the comfort of my desk chair.

I agree.  I often pick up nuances from discussions on the rules, even those which seem to me to be quite straightforward.  For many people, an informed discussion sets an idea in their minds much better than just reading the rule in the book.  Of course, the more complex the question, the more potentially interesting the discussion about it is likely to be.

People learn in different ways.  By discussing rules in depth, you often get more context, see the connections and the separations between various rules better than what many people can get from the dry formatting of the rule book.  

[dennyjones]

1 hour ago, Fourputt said:

Of course, the more complex the question, the more potentially interesting the discussion about it is likely to be.

+1