asking around, my sub for flying type d/e can be successfully antipedanted to airborne = fly or bounce
which is legal, as seen in sky drop discussion
~~~~~~~~~~
antipedant clause said:
If a substitution looks to be traditionally illegal due to an improper syntax, but can be reworded to be a legal substitution without the logic of the substitution changing, then the substitution is considered to be legal.
my sub:
IF crobat is in the evasive stage of a flying type d/e move when you are to act, THEN smack down.
v
illegal syntax is "in the evasive stage of a flying type d/e move"
v
the only moves that fit in those criterion are fly and bounce
v
airborne is a legal sub for evasive stages of fly and bounce (currently not including sky drop)
v
THUS, no changes in logic from what i wrote and airborne
v
no changes in logic but still legal = legal by antipedant
edit @ Frosty: no idea, i asked on irc and was told that that was the illegal part of my sub. imo my sub shoulda been legal and i shoulda used smack down