Rules being ambiguous like this is why we have so many problems with rulings.

I shall give some reasons this is ambiguous, not explicit. Rules were written before we had two crackhouse and were never updated to show this applied to both crackhouses, still have not BTW. While we did gain a second map with the same name, Italy, the new map, the rule was moot as rule five covers it, so it is not a valid precedent. The three examples, cs_crackhouse, cs_italy and xmas_nipperhouse, all have objectives in the house, whereas de_crackhouse has only a spawn. We don't prevent all warding of spawn houses, ala cs_estate_css_final, so we can't assume it's inviolate due to these rules either. Estate even has objectives IN the wardable house.

For my personal side, the night I tried to confirm with Maynard, I got no response, so had to go with my personal theory, which was this rule was meant for the maps that we had at the time when it was written, for the above reasons.