SamhainIA wrote:
and john you are just going to avoid the entire purpose of the project, to prevent all of the individual judges from picking and choosing what ever rules they like, and thus providing an uncertain inconsistent playing field
You've just stated that you are using the answers you feel are more restrictive even if that's no consensus amongst the judges. I don't agree with that approach. If you're not interested in presenting the 'majority' rules or in the case of very close discussions, then the document is not going to provide consistent playing field and becomes "Josh's way to adjudicate"
I'm perfectly fine with adhering to 'rulings' that are in majority agreement on the boards by GM's and encourage it (Which is a large part of the document and I commend you for putting it together). I'm not fine with you choosing the ruling you want to use when there's a clear division and saying "This is how we should all do it."
John