It needs to bite both ways. Not have the rules changed so that one party doesn't have to play by those rules at all and avoid all punishment because the rules were retroactively changed to be what they should have been in the first place after the first group was punished.
Are you arguing that the contravening the original retarded ruling would or would not be changing the rules?
It needs to bite both ways. Not have the rules changed so that one party doesn't have to play by those rules at all and avoid all punishment because the rules were retroactively changed to be what they should have been in the first place after the first group was punished.