(07-31-2015, 05:20 AM)Ozymandias Said: I did not have any issue with that then nor do I take issue with it now but it's sounding like from what you are saying above that that sort of thing isn't allowed. Is that accurate?

Damn yo, it's a good thing I was asking you to verify that an example that you did not specifically mention but that did happen in the past that was not addressed previously does in fact fall under the umbrella of this new rule you are enacting. You know as opposed to saying anywhere in my previous message that said example should be allowed. You're right it is a good thing we aren't doing this for a match.