[blml] Disclosure (was Psyches & deviations)

[Tim West-Meads]

Eric wrote:

> "Agree: To come to an understanding or to terms."
> 
> "Agreement: The state of being agreed." [both AHD]
> 
> IOW, if you have "agreed to disagree" about something, you have an 
> agreement on the subject.

Eric, there exists - in the light of L40E "including a requirement that 
both members of a partnership employ the same system (such a regulation 
must not restrict style and judgement, only method)." - 
a presumed non-empty set of understandings which do not constitute 
regulable agreements.  My examples were intended to be members of that 
set - I am open to other suggestions for possible membership.

Richard wrote:
> I disagree with Tim and John.  In my opinion, if
> something is frequent enough to be disclosed,
> then it is frequent enough to be an implicit
> partnership agreement.

The laws disagree with you.  73C "a player shall disclose all special 
information conveyed to him through partnership agreement or partnership 
experience".  Again there is a presumed non-empty set of information 
conveyed through partnership experience rather than any sort of 
agreement.  The WBF also disagrees - their CC requires explicit 
disclosure of experience of partner's psychic habits but does not allow 
one to base one's own bidding on such knowledge prior to exposure of the 
psych.  A TD *might* rule that the frequency of such actions means the 
bid should be considered systemic (that's a judgement issue) but he may 
not so rule on the basis that *all* partnership experience is a matter of 
agreement.  My own judgement (and John's) is that the experiential 
frequency is high enough to merit disclosure but not high enough to 
bother incorporating into our system/agreements.

Tim