I might have more to post on this when I get home. Presently, I see a question of law and a question of fact.
At the outset, I might note that the section is badly worded: "To hold office" one "must retain an avatar...for the entire duration of their holding office" is inherently a very confusing phrase b/c of the potential for dual meanings of "hold office" within that same sentence.
Quite frankly, either Joe's interpretation or TCash's earlier musings or Migrendel's earlier ruling has the potential of being a valid interpretation. I really wouldn't want to have to face this one.
