> My rule was that a vehicle was an artificially powered object capable of moving The definition of a vehicle is quite broad and you've scoped it rather narrow

> My rule was that a vehicle was an artificially powered object capable of moving The definition of a vehicle is quite broad and you've scoped it rather narrowly. When left so open people may scope it more or less narrow and land on differently scoped definitions. I think there is certainly a middle ground when making rules(and laws). But this example purposefully uses an ill-defined rule to drive a point home.