Re: DIS: Gratuitous arguments for logicians

[omd]

To expand on my previous argument, for what it's worth, I really don't
see an interpretation that causes a problem whose solution would be
making a rule (about evaluating the rules generally) saying something
that (a) is assumed in just about any other context and (b) has always
been left to custom as likely to stand up.  In a sort of proof by
contradiction, the solution would be unreasonable, therefore the
problem does not exist.