So whats the gist? A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. The latter, less cinematic version, is the current focus. And rule-breaking by any other name is still rule-breaking. So how about if we forget about it and move on?
rule-breaking by any other name is not considered objectionable.
( z0 consider :ARG1 ( z1 objectionable :ARG1 ( z2 break :ARG1 ( z3 rule ) :ARG1-of ( z4 name :mod ( z5 other ) :mod ( z6 any ) ) ) ) :polarity - )
(z0 / consider-01
    :ARG1 (z1 / objectionable-02
              :ARG1 (z2 / break-18
                        :ARG1 (z3 / rule-01)
                        :ARG1-of (z4 / name-01
                                     :mod (z5 / other)
                                     :mod (z6 / any))))
    :polarity -)
rule - breaking by any other name is not considered objectionable .
z2 :ARG1 z3
z4 :mod z5
z4 :mod z6
z2 :ARG1-of z4
z0 :polarity 0
z0 :ARG1 z1
z1 :ARG1 z2