[blml] 40B3? [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]

[Herman De Wael]

David Burn wrote:
> [HdW]
> 
> David, in a corner, now invents a totally new argument. The words "during
> the auction" are to be interpreted as "during the auction or until an
> opponent asks a question about partner's bidding".
> 
> Very clever argument, David. Do I really need to refute it?
> 
> [HdW]
> 
> Yes, Herman, you do. Or at least, you need to refute the argument that
> making a call revealing partner's misunderstanding is not also illegal under
> L20F5.
> 
> But what you actually need to do is stop all this nonsense. Even if the Laws
> *are* inconsistent, so what? You have been told by the people who make the
> Laws which one you are to break, if that is how you see the matter. That is
> what you (and everybody else) should do.
> 

OK David, and then I don't. Now work out what my penalty is.

> David Burn
> London, England
> 

-- 
Herman DE WAEL
Antwerpen Belgium
http://users.skynet.be/hermandw/index.html