"Common Sense" approach to rules (RACSD)

[Lapak]

This is not abuse, but exactly how the game functions.

Part of the reason that I like this thread is that I've never found RAW compelling as an argument. In a computer RPG, if I discover that running away from an enemy causes him to get stuck on part of the scenery and unable to fight back? It is certainly 'exactly how the game functions,' but it's called a bug, or an exploit, or abuse. Similarly, if three different writers working on two different books - one writing a specific spell, another writing about special cases of how spells function in general, and another writing a general game rule about conditions that aren't specific to spells - happen to create a rules-state that doesn't make sense and/or is destructive to the gameplay or setting, I'm perfectly willing to call that a mistake even absent an explicit statement of intent by the authors. In the context of forum discussion, it often makes sense to use RAW for a common context, but in a common sense debate I don't know that it's relevant.