Dave S,
One more try. Please read it through before responding to every sentence. It does have a happy ending.
All I'm saying now is that if you take what John Morrisett says as an honest answer, you'll have a hard time convincing the USGA to ban the cheater line (but there may be a way).
John Morrisett says:
It would be unwise for the Rules to attempt to prohibit certain markings on a ball or a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced.
So you say "no, the USGA already does prohibit a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced".
But the only instance you can come up with to argue that the USGA already prohibits "a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced" is the mud-tee example, but in that example, prohibiting the player from teeing it up with the mud is not prohibiting "a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced"
because it is not being replaced, it is being moved (elevated above the ground)!
So you then say "what if the ball is on the mud-tee already when it is lifted? Then you would have to put it back on the mud tee, so you have to replace the ball exactly as you found it, and that's prohibiting a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced". Well, you can still rotate the ball in any orientation as long as the mud is on the bottom. If you tried any other orientation, the ball would drop to the ground and be considered
moved and not
replaced. (I suppose if you could levitate the ball with the mud on the side then the USGA would be OK with that.
)
So if I can edit John Morrisett's response, I would say:
The USGA doesn't want to prohibit a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced, and they don't want to prohibit a certain orientation of the ball EVER unless it would result in the ball being moved.
Right now, the USGA doesn't have to "prohibit a certain orientation of the ball" unless it results in the ball being moved (the mud-tee example--maybe there are other rare instances), which occurs
almost never.
In proposing the ban on the cheater line/trademark used to indicate a line for putting, you're asking the USGA to "prohibit a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced"
every time a ball is replaced on the green.
If John Morrisett's answer is honest, and the USGA doesn't want to "prohibit a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced", do you think that the USGA can be convinced to ban using the cheater line/trademark to align the ball if it means that they now have to do something they don't want to do--"prohibit a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced"--every time someone replaces the ball on the putting green?
You have to realize that it doesn't matter if no one ever uses a cheater line ever again--if the rules don't allow it, then the rules are "prohibiting a certain orientation of the ball when it is replaced". And it sounds like the USGA doesn't want to do that without good reason.
The good reason may be what you got into before, that having to use your own judgment to line yourself up is a principle that takes precedent over the right to orient your ball any way you want when you replace it. Just like the restriction against moving your golf ball takes precedent over your right to orient your ball any way you want when you replace it.
That angle combined with a clear "rule of thumb" to determine if a particular mark (line, trademark, dots, shapes, logos, etc.) indicates a line for putting is probably what would be needed to get the rule changed.
The bonus for you would be that they would probably also have to ban other alignment aids like the Betsy King routine and having your caddy or partner help you line up.