On 5/15/07, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
o_0
Anyone who tries to rules-lawyer "Ignore All Rules" has missed the point by a new record.
Well hopefully that has killed off the codified constitution suggestions.
Actually the claim is rather questionable since it used a definition of wikipedia from [[Wikipedia:Five pillars]] rather than [[WP:NOT]] (the two conflict).
However since direct citation of IAR is itself mearly a rather poor form of rule layering it seems only fair that an attempt be made to rule lawyer around it.
No I understand IAR I just object to people citeing it rather than putting forward a logicaly solid but outside rules argument. Do that well enough and people are unlikely to bring up rules in the first place.