Cat Attack-migration

Hi, longtime lurker, first post. I normally only check out the Silver and Copper sections, on a semi-regular basis. I read the Beerbohm thread as the name seemed familiar from a deal I had quite a few years ago (I'm not accusing Bob of anything, as this was a long time ago and even I'm not sure, I'm just explaining what made me read the thread in the first place). This thread was linked from there, and I've read the discussion about Bob's eligibility for here, given that Matthew wasn't a member at the time. I've read through the rules for the Probation/HOS, and it doesn't seem to cover what I'm about to ask. I do apologise in advance if this has been covered somewhere in this thread prior for someone else. I understand that Matthew wasn't a member at the time, thus negating his eligibility at the time. However, in Matthew's initial post, he mentions this: 'It's important to note that he used several of you as references in this transaction. I guess he knows many of you from comicon and the like. Sparklecitycomics and Dwight Fuhro are two of you that I remember offhand, but there are others from the ccg boards.' Now, that could be interpreted a few different ways, and I'm sure it could be cleared up by either of the parties. I just wanted to ask if it's possible to consider that Bob's own action might have nullified the need for Matthew to be a member, given the specific circumstances. IF I'm reading it right, and Bob used the board, and board members (in the context of their being members of the board) as references to give himself credibility and make Matthew comfortable with trusting the guy, couldn't it be argued that by doing so, Bob created a special circumstance where, despite Matthew not being a member at the time, the board was ALWAYS involved in the transaction due to Bob's invoking of the board from the very start of the deal. If I'm reading it right, Bob brought the board into the transaction from the very beginning, and it was a factor in the deal, as it gave Matthew a level of comfort with his credibility. So could this be seen as a special circumstance, where Bob himself made it so that the board was involved from the very get-go anyway, thus being enough for a 'dispensation' if you will, and making this transaction eligible for possible inclusion on the list? Again, I'm sorry if this sort of thing has been covered before, but I thought it might be worth a mention, as it seems to me like it may change things a little bit, if I'm interpreting Matthew's statement correctly.