[blml] Any redress or rub of the green

[Nigel]

[Eric landau]
You are not *required* to protect yourself here, but if you do not, you
abrogate any claim to have been misinformed. You are perfectly
entitled to fail to protect yourself, hoping that doing so will work to
your advantage at the table. That's the case here: you made a tactical
decision not to protect yourself, hoping to gain by increasing the
chance of your opponents having a bidding misunderstanding. In return,
you gave up any potential redress for MI by not taking action at the
point you knew for sure that you had been given some. Nice
try. Better luck next time.

[nige1]

Again adding insult to injury.

IMO, what is written on a convention card should be taken as a pair's 
agreement -- even if both players have subsequently forgotten it or have 
agreed" something else. A player should never be penalized for relying 
on the accuracy of his opponents' convention card.

Also, it is ludicrous that, in order to obtain redress, you must 
"protect yourself" by asking about a bid that opponents seem to have 
forgotten to alert.

Why are the victims of putative infractions expected to ask such 
kamikaze questions that may
* wake up opponents to a misunderstanding?
* reassure opponents that they are on the same wavelength?
* provide unauthorised information to partner that he must lean over 
backwards to ignore?

Even under current rules where the victim merits no redress, surely the 
law-breaker deserve some sanction? In practice, too often, the director 
simply castigates the victim for not protecting himself but leaves the 
law-breaker unpenalized, encouraged by his ill-gotten gains.