@Hoarde
I agree that one of my points was circumstantial but that's all I have to go on and therefore I'm, willing to believe it. I personally don'#t think its that far fetched (I also like to believe I'm not a gullible person
I believe Azonalanthious has it regarding the missing premise in my logic. Leaked materials have been long used in marketing tactics. Its unorthodox here in this industry but then how else do you do cheap market research?
In my line of work I don't work in a Publishing house but I do deal in publishing and I can say that it does not take that long after the material is sent to the printers to have it printed, bound, packed and shipped. Maybe I'm wrong, maybe GW use rubbish printers...
Another point would be the all the mistakes found in GW material. I think we all know they do not proof read their material (which is a massive shame all you GW guys reading this!) so them having made the leak mid-Jan is still plausible for a July/Aug release.
Consequently, you "Know" 6th Ed is to be released then, for sure
But after all that, if you "know" these rules are fake then why are you bothering to critisise? I mean your entire last post was to counter another. You didn't really say anything of any substance. Why not just lets us get on with our folly and waste our time, its surely no skin off your nose.
OR....... you could like I said, go in with the spirit of things and actually discuss the intricacies of these changes....