This is all a waste of time.
A number of years ago, the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club refused the entries of a person, after receiving deposition testimony from a number of witnesses. That person appealed to the AKC. The AKC shared with that person the club's submission to the AKC. The AKC did not share with the Rocky Mountain Retriever Club that person's submission to the AKC. The club received a letter in the mail telling the club that it needed to accept the person's entries at the next FT.
I called the AKC to ask what we needed to do better. The AKC rep told me that we did not prove our case "beyond a reasonable doubt." When I asked the rep to explain to me why the AKC imposed a criminal standard (beyond a reasonable doubt), not a civil standard (a preponderance of the evidence), he said "talk to the lawyers." When I asked what we needed to do differently in the future, he said "talk to the lawyers." When I called the AKC lawyers, they said "we're not talking to you."
I told both the AKC rep and the lawyers in a letter - very politely - to go screw themselves.
The moral of this story - the AKC is composed of a bunch of pussies who will back down every time. So, there is no use in imposing a rule that the AKC will not enforce.
Not to mention that the proposed amendment is incomprehensible
What a waste of time