[blml] But me no buts [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Jerry Fusselman]

"Law X:  A player must do such-and-such (but see Law Y)."

I was hoping that laws in that form would be absent from the new law
book.  To me, this is a vague style.  The parenthetical, according to
Grattan, makes it less basic or  basically ignorable or something like
that (I could not quite understand the Grattanesse in that case).

The following style seems fine and clear to me:

"A player must do such-and-such, except in case whatsit (which Law Y covers)."

If there is an exception to the requirement to do such-and-such, I
would like to see the exception explicit and unparenthetical.

If laws X and Y hold in different circumstances completely, then the
cross reference is not needed.  For example, if X is for UI and Y is
for MI, I would rather not see mention of Y inside law X.

I think I object most to the phrase "but see,"  because it causes the
law to be open to multiple interpretations.  If one law overrides
another, please make it clear which overrides.  A "but see"
construction is likely to be unclear on what overrides what.

Jerry Fusselman