"leaving engagement attacks" are not "attacks" -> FAQ?

[dok]

I have recently been involved in a discussion on whether Spider-Man's Spider Sense applies to a leaving engagement attack (assuming he is not using his swing line, which avoids leaving engagement attacks). Several people have quite reasonably objected to the weird effect this could cause, where Spider Man would get a swing line move and then continue on his walking move. But the only real argument against it, as I see, is that "leaving engagement attack" aren't real attacks.

Now, this particular viewpoint has some history around here. It's the same justification we use to keep Syvarris, Krug, Guilty, and Skahen from attacking twice with leaving engagement attacks. It's also the same justification we use to keep the Minions of Utgar and the Omnicron Snipers from dealing two wounds with a successful leaving engagement attack. So, obviously, there's a good rationale for playing this way.

That said, I can't escape the feeling that we've collectively invented this argument out out of whole cloth, simply because it's a convenient ruling. If I were arguing with someone on this point, there's really nothing I can point to in the rules or the FAQs to prove that leaving engagement attacks aren't attacks. If I say, "but then Syvarris gets two leaving engagement attacks", the other person can simply shrug and say "sure, why not?", and I don't have any strong counter-argument. I can point out that the words "leaving engagement attack" are in quotes in the rules, but that's a tenuous argument at best.

So, I think this should be a FAQ entry. "Leaving engagement attacks do not count as attacks for the purposes of special abilities", or something along those lines.