[blml] San Diego Lightfoot Sue [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Robert Geller]

I don't think the problem is so serious.  For example, in the case of many
events in Japan we adopt the regulation that where no specfic local
regulation exists the WBF conditions of contest are held to apply.
This kind of approach allows the combination of local rules (regarding
alerting, conventions, etc) with a default for really obscure cases.

-Bob  

Guthrie さんは書きました:
>Richard Hills:
>It is impossible to have a sensible debate using undefined terms
>such as "complete".  Nigel has already admitted that a bridge
>venue's culinary regulation is excluded from his concept of
>"complete".  But what else is also excluded from Nigel's concept
>of "complete"?
>
>Hiring fee for the Director?
>Starting time?
>Length of session?
>Movement of players and boards?
>Victory point scale?
>Etc?
>Etc, etc?
>
>[nige1]
>As usual, I assume a simple common-sense interpretation. I'm sorry if 
>Richard finds such a proposal hard to grasp.
>
>I mean complete in the sense that the rules for most games are 
>complete. In the case of Bridge, I feel this should include disclosure 
>rules (e.g screens, convention cards, pre-announcements, 
>announcements, alerting, licensing and the like). Rules about new 
>devices like clocks, dealing machines, duplimates, and even computers. 
>Probably also suggestions for Victory point scales and Swiss competitions.
>
>Most of these rules already exist in one form or another. For example, 
>online sites like BBO have created sensible disclosure rules for that 
>medium.
>
>I agree that rules about the starting time, length of session, 
>director's hair-style and the like are outside the remit of the normal 
>rules for a game.
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>blml mailing list
>blml at amsterdamned.org
>http://www.amsterdamned.org/mailman/listinfo/blml

-----------------------------------------------------
Robert (Bob) Geller,     Tokyo, Japan        geller at nifty.com