On Mon, 2013-07-29 at 19:41 -0400, Fool wrote: > Anyways, I did see your other message (sorry, a lot to reply to). The > rule has power three and says I can do it by announcement. You really > have to argue the rule does not say so, the other arguments are > extraneous. Otherwise you're saying whenever something is secured, and a > sufficiently powered rule says it CAN be done by announcement, it still > fails.
Hmm. I thought that was indeed the case, but it seems that that higher standard only applies to rule changes, not secured changes in general. (So any of your attempts to change rules via this scam fail, but that by itself does not stop the deregistration.) However, Rule 1688 says "except as allowed by an Instrument". I don't think you can point to a single instrument that's doing the allowing here (given that you've constructed your logic based on the interaction of multiple rules), and the rule doesn't say "an Instrument or combination of Instruments", so it still stops the scam, just not for the reason I thought. -- ais523
