On Fri, 18 Aug 2000 TeamZ3@aol.com wrote:
> Second, the SEB has already issued a statement stating that drilling,
> cutting, etc. through interior panel, sheetmetal, etc. for the *explicit*
> sole function of shock adjustment is not allowed.
Had I been asked to make the decision, I would have decided differently.
I think that both the "letter" and "intent" are both a bit unclear, and
certainly "reasonable people" could differ on this.
But I'm concerned, as a relative newbie, that without access to the "oral
history" that appears to accompany protests, clarifications, etc, that I
am at a disadvantage.
I find tech bulletins going back to October 1999 on the website, and I'm
going to go read them all, but shouldn't *all* the clarifications made for
stock class be in the rulebook? Or at least together in one place?
And shouldn't the results of protests be published? Could we have a sort
of "case law" system, where the results of protests are considered "law"
until overturned or upheld by the SEB?
Steven
p.s. Sure, I could just ask for a clarification on every modification I
make. But should I have to?
|