[blml] Double Dummy play [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[richard.hills at immi.gov.au]

Richard Hills:

>>Herman is now arguing that he is the guardian of the WBF
>>guardians, so Herman is now arguing that he has the power
>>to reinterpret a WBF interpretation contrary to the intent
>>of the authors of that WBF interpretation.
>>
>>:-)
>

Herman De Wael:

>Of course, we all know that it is the Australian
>Immigration Authority that has the sole knowledge of WHAT
>the intent of the authors of a WBF interpretation is.

Richard Hills:

Of course, we all know that it is an Antwerp Director who
reads only what he wants to read, since earlier in the
previous post a co-author of that WBF interpretation was
specifically quoted (the quote is repeated here for those
acolytes of the De Wael School who happen to be literate).

Grattan Endicott (WBF CoP co-author), 5th June 2007:

" ... There is no *design* to convey UI when a player
answers a question that the laws require him to answer.
                                        Grattan ~   +=+"

Herman De Wael

>If my interpretation of the words "without design" is
>wrong ...

Richard Hills:

A recent book refuting the faddish quantum physics idea of
string theory is entitled "Not Even Wrong", on the grounds
that string theory is not scientific since by the nature of
the theory it is impossible to prove or disprove.

(The theory of "intelligent design" is unscientific, so not
even wrong, for the same reason.)

All of Herman's past, present and future interpretations of
the Lawbook are not even wrong for this reason ->

WBF Laws Committee minutes, 24th August 1998, item 6:

6. Internet Bridge Laws Mailing list.
The activities of the bridge laws mailing list on the
Internet were mentioned. The Chairman expressed anxiety lest
Directors, especially those in poor contact with their NBOs,
began to take guidance from this source, some of whose
contributors present strange opinions. The Secretary
supported the Chairman in what he had said. The Committee
was in part inclined to believe they should bring forward
requests for decisions formally; the view was taken that
subjects might be collected and brought to the Committee at
each year's meetings.
The Secretary remarked that past decisions and recorded
intentions of the Committee represented the position of the
Committee unless and until it changed them.


Best wishes

Richard James Hills, amicus curiae
Level 6 Aqua Training Suite, DIAC
02 6225 6776

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