[blml] ...have we really come to this??? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[John Probst]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tim West-Meads" <twm at cix.co.uk>
To: <blml at rtflb.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 12:17 PM
Subject: Re: [blml] ...have we really come to this??? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]


snip

>>
>> "The Director is bound by these Laws and by supplementary
>> regulations announced by the sponsoring organisation."
>
> Which is mitigated by L80F "to publish or announce regulations
> supplementary to, but not in conflict with, these Laws."
>
> As a TD I refuse to enforce regulations which are in conflict with the
> laws.  Illegal regulations are not binding on TDs and "interpretations of
> law" by bodies other than the WBFLC have no legal standing.

The TD's primary duities include running the game according to the laws. If, 
in the opinion of the TD a regulation is illegal, then he *should* disregard 
it as it is in conflict with the Laws. An interpretation handed down by the 
WBFLC, however, is an interpretation, and has the force of law. So Tim and I 
are in agreement, as is mostly the case.

John

>
> Tim
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> blml mailing list
> blml at amsterdamned.org
> http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml