Rethinking Smoke

[Grognard Gunny]

The idea of a "supreme court" of rules (kind of) appeals to me, but..... In a world of hobbyists, all with different ideas as to how the rules "should be".... perhaps it IS an unlikely scenario. Then again, if we let everyone develop their own "Rules" (options/additional/variants, et al.), we end up with a set of "rules" that are "standardized" only in so far as the two players involved at the moment say they are standardized. In short, an "Anarchist" approach to the "rules". (Or maybe it should read, "rules" that I don't like and therefore don't play as written".  ) (One and the same, if you look at it objectively.)

Yes, they are finical, time draining, frustrating.... all this (and more), but they are the "rules" and we should bide by them as they represent the basis of the game(s) we play and everyone has in common. Which is why there should be a review process AND an amendment process by which we can all ascribe to.

Just sayin'. 

GG