[blml] 40B3? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Alain Gottcheiner]

gesta at tiscali.co.uk a écrit :
> +=+ It is more precisely Law 40A - and 40C3(b) - 
> that establishes the requirement to disclose. However,
> the rulings and pronouncements of many years run 
> counter to the suggestion that it is an infraction to convey 
> UI to partner when complying with the requirement to 
> disclose the partnership understanding. 
Then why not write in in the Laws ? Those pronouncements go against 
several items of Law.
> It has been 
> repeatedly stated that the illegality arises  when the 
> partner uses the UI. 
IBTD.
One irregularity that happens at the table is a player's use of UI.
Another irregularity that happens at the table is a player's creation of 
UI when he is conscious that he creates it (L73 B1 and others). That's 
the part dWSites are wary of.

>  The dWS argument is a wish in 
> the mind of a player who puts his personal rendition 
> of the law on a superior plane
At least it is firmly in my mind.
But if the authorities want to amend L73 B1 (and also perhaps L 73 A1, 
L73 F - old numbers) in such a way that my remark above be no mere 
relevant, I'd be delighted.


By the same token, unless it's already been made in 2007, I'd like a 
rephrasing of L73B2, whose 1997 formulation seems to admit occult 
communication.
In French : "des méthodes de communicaztion occultes autres que celles 
autorisées par les Lois", obviously implying that some occult methods, 
at least, are allowed.

Best regards

   Alain