Romano's10th Law

Romano's 10th Law states:

Every computer science statement formulated as a rule risks getting wide acceptance as long as it is controversial enough and presented on an ordinal form.

It is followed by the devCatharsis corollary:

Talking about something that maters and coming from a trusted authority may help.

Oops, their goes Romano's 10th Law wide acceptance :)  So what about the preceding 9? Well, they just doesn't exist. I'm following a trend started by Philip Greenspun on his Greenspun's 10th Law. The law states:

Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad-hoc, informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common Lisp.

When asked about the preceding 9 laws, Greenspun answered:

Sorry, Han-Wen, but there aren't 9 preceding laws. I was just trying to give the rule a memorable name. [...] I have only a dim recollection of writing this originally. [...] It is ironic that this will, after my death, probably be the one thing that anyone remembers from my writing.

So we are all reading and writing about a 10th Law that doesn't have 9 preceding ones on which the author had a limited recollection and had to google for the original content... and it is okay: it is still a great rule from someone that doesn't feel like belonging in the pantheon of Lisp Gods, but clearly belongs in the pantheon of great statements :)