Probably because that's how a lot of us have learned how to play RPG's. That was the intent behind the other thread I started, ie. to show-case a difference in how people come at rules.Isn't it? Everywhere I go here, I see posts essentially amounting to "It seems clear that the author's intent was ... " or "It is clear that it was designed to work in some way and not another". The 2 most prevalent examples that come to find is the issue of fighter marking and whether a paladin can "mark and run".
I wouldn't consider myself old-school, more middle-school, but having learned to play RPG's with Chaosism, AD&D 1e/2e, GURPS, Palladium, etc. where interpretation of rules was the done thing. People who quoted RAW were 'rules lawyers' and that was considered a bad thing.
I'm not saying it is a bad thing, and I guess I could've phrased myself less aggressively, just trying to show you where I was coming from with what I was saying.
As far as telling you how to play your game, that to me is out of left-field. I really don't care how you play or if you play with aliens and furries. That's totally your call. I was just saying what I think, that was all.