[blml] The sixth sick sheik's sixth sheep is sick [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Jerry Fusselman]

On 9/25/07, richard.hills at immi.gov.au <richard.hills at immi.gov.au> wrote:>
> The question of forgetting an explicit partnership agreement and
> thus creating an over-riding implicit partnership agreement is
> one of frequency according to Law 75B:
>
> "...habitual violations within a partnership may create implicit
> agreements, which must be disclosed..."
>
> So there is a Lawful difference between a single forget compared to
> habitual forgetting.
>

I wasn't talking about forgets at all, and I don't agree with this point.

Law 75B starts with "A player may violate an announced partnership
agreement, so long as his partner is unaware of the violation (but
habitual violations within a partnership may create implicit
agreements, which must be disclosed)."

The parenthetical is not meant to be the only way an explicit
agreement differs from what should be disclosed.  It is only one
example.  Besides, it is just a parenthetical.  The fundamental law is
75A: "Special partnership agreements, whether explicit or implicit,
must be fully and freely available to the opponents... ."

If you know for sure that your partner is using agreement Y even
though X is the written agreement, you don't get to wait until he bids
using Y half a dozen times before you say the agreement is Y.
Similarly, if you know your partner is surely going to forget that he
agreed to play X, you are not supposed to wait until that
virtually-certain forget takes place half a dozen times before you
give better information.  Thus, it is false to say that "creating an
over-riding implicit partnership agreement is one of frequency."
Frequency of forgets is just one way.  Another is knowing your partner
will forget.

Jerry Fusselman