A bit of history for those new to this discussion:

I'm not sure how long ago it started, but it's months not days ago, and
friend Neal basically started off by stating that since a sailboat and a
power driven vessel made different signals in fog, there was a full
pecking order in fog and a sailboat was then considered a stand-on
vessel when it heard the fog signal of a powerdriven vessel. Also, that
it didn't need to reduce speed since it was all ready at a reduced
speed. (someone can look back to confirm this, or possibly Jeff or Shen
can confirm my memory).
Needless to say, he was shown to be wrong, and since then has been
trying to talk his way out of it ..... to no avail, as you can all see,
by trying to apply abstract conditions to the basic "in sight" and "not
in sight" conditions of the initial discussions.

Regarding rule 6 and 19 .... keep in mind, that those responsible for
the rules, seem to be aware that you cannot write a rule to cover every
situation, so "insert" rule 2.
Although the wording of rule 6 and 19 in most sections, does not
specifically state "reduce speed" the implication is there, and "rule
2", you are responsible to act upon that implication.

As I've said before, Neal is a basic "newbie" who has somehow gotten a
beginners license, which he's rarely if ever used. His knowledge of the
rules is based on his own reading and interpretation, not experience or
real knowledge of their meaning or intent.
The best reason to get into an argument/discussion on any maritime
subject, with Neal, is to learn how NOT to think or interpret the
"Rules", or any other subject, for that matter, I've seen him expound
upon, as BG I have seen him come up with some clever ways to try and
"cover his butt".

otn