User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45314928-20200610043202/@comment-45314928-20200723214450

User:SOTO/Forum Archive/The Panopticon/@comment-45314928-20200610043202/@comment-45314928-20200723214450 Her ruling was about validity, because that was all the discussion was about. She did not rule in regards to coverage because that was never brought up, hence the existence of this thread - to discuss its coverage. So I don’t understand, at all, how you could try to dismiss this thread by suggesting that Shamblar had already ruled on the subject “to neither of our personal satisfactions” when she hadn’t ruled about coverage at all.

Once again, the previous discussion was NOT about coverage - but about validity. Completely different. So I am not breaking any rules by discussing this, and if I were I’d appreciate you leave it to an admin to tell me.