Quote Originally Posted by Suck fumes View Post
Couldn’t have said it any better Marshall. I have always thought the whole “intent” thing was kind of odd because this was the only class I have ever raced in where I have heard arguments about “intent” of the rule. Rules need to be clearly written and spelled out. If they are not then they can be creatively interpreted by anyone. But saying that it doesn’t meet the “intent” is not a strong argument at all.
In Aerospace, we use the "Shall"/"Should" argument.
Shall is a direct requirement that will be followed (written rule)
Should is a "it would be nice to comply, but not required" (intent)

http://asq.org/standards-shall-should