From my little corner of the world, I can see both sides of this issue, to a degree...

I have benefitted from information that it.com folks have been willing to share (like what is the listed weight of that Oldsmobile!). I will be returning to this game in a year or two and want to make informed decisions but am not thrilled about buying a GCR that won't be current when I really need it. Graduate school makes you stingy, I guess.

Having said that, providing answers CAN lead to the spreading of misinformation or, in the case of this organization, interpretations that might not be universally held. We might be doing a disservice to people who are starting out, if we don't encourage them to read and understand the rules--as wobbly as they might be--so they can go into any issue from a defensible position. "Some guy in improvedtouring.com told me it was legal" won't carry much weight if the tech-shed doody gets deep!

The best answer is a balance and I think we have seen it here, in both the number of answers to questions that COULD be found in a quick review of the GCR and the number of times that folks have been cautioned to get the rule book before they start cutting!

Of course, the best answer (short of a really well-written, compehensive set of rules) would be some kind of "official" forum that would allow IT entrants to get interpretations (beyond answers from the rulebook) in writing from those empowered to make them. It would also help if the GCR didn't represent a revenue stream for the corporation--there would be no disincetive to putting it on line were that the case.

Best to all,

Kirk