[blml] Any redress or rub of the green [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

WBF Code of Practice:

>>(c) psychic calls of various kinds have occurred in the
>>partnership with such frequency, and sufficiently recently,
>>that the partner is clearly aware of the tendency for such
>>psychic calls to occur;

Eric Landau:

>I'm not sure how to interpret this.  It seems to say that if
>one has gained a reputation for psyching frequently (of
>which one's partner is aware), any attempt to psych will be
>treated as the exercise of an implicit partnership
>understanding, even if the context for the psych is
>unprecedented.  That would mean that a known frequent
>psycher may not -- indeed, presumptively can not -- psych
>ever, at least until his reputation for doing so frequently
>has been forgotten.

Richard Hills:

In my opinion Eric Landau has misinterpreted this clause of
the WBF Code of Practice.  It seems to me that Eric has read
"partner is clearly aware of the tendency for psychic calls
to occur" when the actual wording is "partner is clearly
aware of the tendency for **such** psychic calls to occur".

The word "such" makes a big difference in meaning.

Pocket Oxford Dictionary:

"such, adj.  Of the kind or degree indicated by context or
circumstances"

Richard Hills:

For example, suppose the auction frequently and recently
proceeded 3C - (Double) - 3H.  And suppose that 3H was
nationally natural with strong values, but was actually a
"baby psyche" with short hearts and weak values.  Then "such"
an auction as 3D - (Double) - 3S, even if "such" an auction
had never been previously "baby psyched", would be deemed to
be an implicit agreement if it was baby psyched for the first
time.

But an entirely different style of psyche, for example a
psyche where one chose to pass as dealer with a 4-7-2-0
shape and 17 hcp, would not be "such" a psyche as a "baby
psyche", so would not be deemed an implicit agreement under
clause (c) above merely because it was perpetrated by a known
"baby psycher".


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
National Training Branch, DIAC
02 6223 9052

Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately.  This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally
privileged and/or copyright information.  Any review, retransmission,
dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other
than the intended recipient is prohibited. DIAC respects your privacy and
has obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental
privacy policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au
See: http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm