[blml] L20F1

[Alain Gottcheiner]

At 14:59 22/11/2006 +0000, John Probst wrote:


>Both Tim and I believe that where there is a conflict between MI and UI, the
>MI MUST be corrected, regardless of the creation of UI. I personally take
>this to extremes and await the wrath of the TD.  An ethical partnership is
>particularly careful to avoid use of UI, and accepts that sometimes its
>creation is necessary in order to correct MI. It then becomes the problem
>for the OS to resolve the UI as best it can.  John

I believe that when there is a conflict between MI and UI, the Laws should 
provide for MI not being corrected, possibly even amplified, to avoid 
creating UI, because :
- correcting MI before the lead is usually easier than dealing with UI ;
- most OS will find it less unpleasant to have their score changed based on 
MI (which is bona fide) rather than on UI (which always carries some 
suspicions) ;
- "it's up to the OS to deal with the UI" isn't a good idea, because many 
can't, and above all, because every AC has its own idea about what is 
"using UI" and what is not ; therefore this procedure is laid open to 
arbitrariness - hence resentment. To the contrary, what is MI and what is 
not can be ascertained with all due objectivity.

Best regards,

   Alain
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.amsterdamned.org/pipermail/blml/attachments/20061123/7a550c24/attachment.htm