I think what Ren was saying is that the rules aren't the most vital part of it all, very important, of course, but the Images and connection to the actual situation is the part that we can't go without, we can read with missing rules.
Lets say someone asks if their boss likes them(check the other forum for more info)... Their line moves from Asset to Sibling and while it combines on Asset with the boss(Officer) it will clash him on Sibling.
We don't need fancy rules here... The person moves from asset(something valuable to the company/boss) to Sibling(just one of many).
The boss likes him on Asset(combination) and has a lot of problems with him on sibling(clash).
Then if there is unexpected outcome we look again. And we adjust by the very way that the events happened, so lets say after this the boss still likes him on sibling - then the clash didn't happen for some reason. We look why...
The rules will, sometimes, come from the interactions, we can view the actual event and the Images we use are much more important. The rules are important, but since that part is not reflected well in most sources, we can deduce them by the outcome. But need to connect the events to the images first.
In short - its better(when there are missing rules) to let the events guide you. If you just describe each step after that as you see it(clash - they will have problems, moving line - something is changing, initial line - its position before the change etc.) usually much of it is very close to reality and often its enough to even get the answer correct.
This is just my approach, I'm happy with it, however and I think that was the point Ren was pointing to, as well.
And in this, Images are more important then the rules. If the Images are right with enough questions the rules mayl follow.
In that sense I agree about Harmen as well.
The materials there provide a lot of deeper view to each element interacting and that by itself is what we need, most of the time.