[blml] The Rubaiyat of Law 58B2

[Steve Willner]

From: richard.hills at immi.gov.au
> However, as you attempt to lead the deuce of
> spades, you unintentionally drop both the
> queen of spades and the deuce of spades
> simultaneously face up on the table.

We had a very long thread on this subject perhaps three or four years 
ago.  As already seen in the current thread, opinion was split but 
fiercely held on both sides.  I'm slightly surprised there is no WBFLC 
minute on the subject by now -- or have I missed one?

Richard's case has a new wrinkle in that defender's probable intention 
can be inferred from the bridge situation.  In more common cases, the 
original intention can't be known without mind reading.

My own opinion (FWIW) will come as no surprise to regular readers: read 
L58B2 literally -- 'proposes' is present tense, not past -- and dismiss 
any interpretation that requires mind reading.  L10C1 may also be 
relevant.  And "equity" proponents should be happy with the least 
penalty that preserves the rights of the NOS.  (No villain will expect 
to gain by dropping two cards on the table.)  Despite that, one can see 
how some people will take the opposite view.