[blml] A good idea

[raija]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Easterson" <JffEstrsn at aol.com>
To: "Bridge Laws Mailing List" <blml at amsterdamned.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 10:48 AM
Subject: [blml] A good idea


> Herman wrote, in one of his postings, "if...I will not read any more of
> your...postings."
> I have purposely shortened that because the parts left out seem to me to
> be irrelevant to my idea/suggestion.  I am not trying to alter the 
> meaning.
> I think the idea/principle Herman mentions is very good.  If we all
> should refuse to read (or respond to) the postings regarding a certain
> subject (you can choose at will) it might reduce the volume of the blml
> postings by at least 50% and thus save us all a good deal of time and,
> possibly, aggravation.  After all, the way to get any new idea adopted
> (as has been often mentioned) is to send it through your NO (or whatever
> the national federation is called).  So why are we discussing it at such
> length in blml?  Send it in, and if it is not accepted try to talk to
> the appropriate people who decide such matters.  That would seem much
> more effective than debating at such infinite length in blml.  Ciao, JE
>
A very good idea.  Sven made this approach on February 7 and received 
Herman's answer same day.

This is uncut quote of exchange between Herman and Sven:

Sven Pran wrote on February 7, 2008:
>> Herman: I miss one piece of information in your statement below; how does
>> the Belgian bridge world consider DWS?
>>
>> Would you care to state whether or not the Belgian bridge federations (I
>> understand there are two or three bridge federations in Belgium?) support
>> your ideas on DWS?
>>
>> Is DWS officially recognized as legal in Belgium?

Herman de Wael wrote:
> In the sense that every Director I talk to, and explain my reasons,
> they agree with me, there is no problem here.
>
> But then these people aren't tainted by David Burn's writings on blml.
>
> But you might ask Alain about this.
>

Not sure how many directors Herman has talked to because it is not clear 
from what he says, see the quote. Looking closely at what he says there, the 
number he has talked to could be zero or it could be any number of directors 
in Belgium.  But what *is* clear is the following  - direct and uncut 
quote -
"In the sense that every Director I talk to, and explain my reasons, they 
agree with me, there is no problem here."

If they indeed agreed, it is POSSIBLE they agreed because Herman is in a 
position of authority in law matters in Belgium and they choose to not 
disagree with a view held by the person in a position that has the authority 
to issue law interpretations in Belgium.

However, *IF* there is such support for HdW interpretation in Belgium, 
*THEN* it is at least strange to me [an outsider, lurker on blml] that their 
NBO did nothing to contact the WBFLC to initiate law changes in that 
direction in the many years that the DWS debate has been going on.  My 
knowledge on any facts around this is based on information from blml only. 
Obviously, I have recently had lots of free time to read the volumes posted 
here...LOL.

Raija