No, I'm not mistaken about precision because I never brought it up. It's a strawman solely of your own construction. (I, instead, suggested a much less precise rule, prohibiting all replies/discussion.)
You're implying that the rule here is written like the guidelines, but it isn't.
The guidelines provide some kind of explanation, reasoning, or purpose adjacent to a rule.
The "try explain better, on a case by case basis" doesn't actually succeed, only the same reason, in, perhaps, a different word order.
Surely you don't need that kind of repetition of explanation of purpose for the guidelines, since it's already there to be read. Why such resistance to doing that here, too?
You're implying that the rule here is written like the guidelines, but it isn't.
The guidelines provide some kind of explanation, reasoning, or purpose adjacent to a rule.
The "try explain better, on a case by case basis" doesn't actually succeed, only the same reason, in, perhaps, a different word order.
Surely you don't need that kind of repetition of explanation of purpose for the guidelines, since it's already there to be read. Why such resistance to doing that here, too?