I agree wholeheartedly. Several days ago I posted a question whether anyone
has any documentation that substantial damage was done to a structure because
of an erroneous assumption of diaphragm flexibility. I have yet to hear from
anyone on this issue. If this has not happened and most of us agree that this
is a ridiculous assumption for lightframe wood construction we should
definitely pursue this with ICBO and SEAOC either on local or statewide
PS For anyone who may not have read all the treads on this issue I would like
to refer you to "Rigid vs Flexible Diaphragms-some comments" by Mark Swingle.
It as an excellent summary of the whole subject.