Was it me?
I had a thread on this subject a few months ago. After reading a lot of posting on the subject, I concluded that there are no rules. RCI will say it's the resort, the resort will say it's RCI, and neither will respond, even in the face of violations of what few rules they have. For example, a group of resorts decided to have a 1 in 4 cover the entire group. A TUGger had asked all the questions and was given an exchange into one of the group (not the one he had visited) before the new policy was put in place. RCI has a policy that an exchange that is "legal" when it is made will stand. The exchange was cancelled a very few weeks before the travel, with no discussion allowed. The resort was tickled that RCI finally had begun to enforce their new rule, RCI blamed the resort, the resort didn't have to say anything.
In discussing the rules with a knowledgable VC, she brought up that particular group of resorts and trade, as she was still upset that RCI had revoked a legal exchange in violation of its own rules.
In my case, I had been assured by resort staff that if RCI made the exchange then the resort would honor it. I decided to have RCI cancel it and found another. What could have come of it? I could have been out in the street with no recourse. The good egg at the resort could have been dragged into a situation that could have gotten her reprimanded or fired, and some slick sales weasel would have had a scalp (mine!)to hang in his cubicle.
Orange Lake and Vistana come up all the time for trades. It's enough to make you want to buy a quarter of an every-other year studio, or anything, just to get around that da*ned 1 in 4. Yes, I know that Orange Lake is one in three. That's a distinction without a difference, IMHO.
Those rules are put in by the sales weasels. Don't trust what anybody is telling you, the sales weasels or Cendant's RCI. They will put on blank looks faster than you can get your blood pressure up.