G. wrote:
> I'd hesitate to throw out any of b-d. "This fails", even without
> further explanation, could be (and probably has been) used as a
> courtesy when one is legally required to attempt an action which is
> blocked by something else.
This interpretation is plausible, but I still think it's ambiguous
enough to be ineffective, especially since it should be straightforward
to write it unambiguously under e) instead ("this probably fails because
<reason> but I'm trying anyway as required").
> Or maybe it's added for flavor/challenge
> when a specific scam attempt wouldn't work for a withheld reason.
Scams tend to fall outside "in general".
