[blml] 2007 laws

[Eric Landau]

On Oct 16, 2007, at 9:04 PM, Guthrie wrote:

> [Eric Landau]
> ISTM that "extended considerably" is a rather misleading
> understatement.  I believe the phrase Grattan is looking for is more
> along the lines of "absolute total power with no constraint,
> restriction or oversight".
>
> [Jerry Fuselmann]
> I agree with Eric, and I worry about this change.  What is to keep the
> majority in an RA from making everyone bid more like them?
>
> [nige1]
> To the naive player it may seem remiss of the WBFLC to devolve so much
> legislation to local jurisdictions (and relegate so many decisions to
> subjective criteria).
>
> Some players wonder why the WBFLC won't at least define a complete set
> of *default* rules -- some of which, local jurisdictions could amend.

I'd have expected Nigel to be pleased with the new L40, which takes a  
first step in this direction.  Although it leaves it entirely up to  
the RA to regulate "special partnership understandings", it does  
contain the first "Nigellian default rule" we've seen: L40B1(b)  
specifies what shall constitute a "special partnership  
understanding" (a "convention"(?) or "any call that has an artificial  
meaning") in the absense of any action by the RA.


Eric Landau
1107 Dale Drive
Silver Spring MD 20910
ehaa at starpower.net