dg50@chrysler.com wrote:
> Well, even from a purely philosophical viewpoint, I don't think you can
>separate
> history from theory when it comes to update/backdate. No matter what one's
> opinion is on "are DSMs one generation or two" the fact is that the rule has
> been on the books for a while (4 years), that Denver has explicitly sanctioned
> the modifications, and that a population of club members are deeply affected
>by
> the change.
Dennis,
The chairman of the SEB, whose job is is to interpret the rules (kind of
like the Supreme Court and the Constitution), says that this issue has
never been ruled on in the past. Yet you say "Denver has explicitely
sanctioned the modifications."
Who sanctioned them? Who did you talk to? Do you have something in
writing?
I'm not trying to be confrontational, I'm just trying to figure out
where everyone is coming from. I'm sure I'd be as frustrated as you are
in your shoes. But I can say that you are not the first one to think
that they have received an official rule clarification only to find out
that it didn't actually come from the SEB. In the future, note to all
of you -- if you don't get an official ruling FROM THE SEB, then it's
not an official ruling. It bothers me that letters to the SEB sometimes
get answered unofficially. Of course, for all I know, you didn't even
write a letter. Where did your ruling come from?
Josh
|