Richard James HILLS
2014-03-28 04:57:51 UTC
UNOFFICIAL
Note that the term "revoke penalty" no longer exists in the 2007
Lawbook; the terminological ideal is now "revoke rectification".
Rhetorical question:
Why should a particular observant East-West gain an excessive
rectification because of what might happen at another table to a
hypothetical unobservant East-West?
WBF Code of Practice, page four:
"No account is to be taken of the interests of other contestants in
the outcome."
Robert Sheckley, The Status Civilization (1960):
"You must judge," Dravivian said. "In this room you can see
Earth's civilization in miniature. Tell me what you think of it."
"It feels lifeless," Barrent said.
Dravivian turned to Barrent and smiled. "Yes, that's a good word
for it. Self-involved might perhaps be better. This is a high-status
room, Barrent. A great deal of creativity has gone into the artistic
improvement of ancient archetypes. My family has re-created a bit
of the Spanish past, as others have re-created bits of the Mayan,
Early American, or Oceanic past. And yet, the essential hollowness
is obvious."
UNOFFICIAL
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately. This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally privileged
and/or copyright information. Any review, retransmission, dissemination
or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient is prohibited. DIBP respects your privacy and has
obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental privacy
policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au. See:
http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------
E-W might well accept this claim without checking the cards
carefully, as the play looks normal to both of them. If E-W don't
catch this error, then South (who all agree was careless, not
cheating) gets a trick he could not have won; the two-trick
penalty (in which he loses a trick he could not have lost on
rational play) protects E-W from being placed in an inferior
position by South's mis-sorting.
Richard Hills:carefully, as the play looks normal to both of them. If E-W don't
catch this error, then South (who all agree was careless, not
cheating) gets a trick he could not have won; the two-trick
penalty (in which he loses a trick he could not have lost on
rational play) protects E-W from being placed in an inferior
position by South's mis-sorting.
Note that the term "revoke penalty" no longer exists in the 2007
Lawbook; the terminological ideal is now "revoke rectification".
Rhetorical question:
Why should a particular observant East-West gain an excessive
rectification because of what might happen at another table to a
hypothetical unobservant East-West?
WBF Code of Practice, page four:
"No account is to be taken of the interests of other contestants in
the outcome."
Robert Sheckley, The Status Civilization (1960):
"You must judge," Dravivian said. "In this room you can see
Earth's civilization in miniature. Tell me what you think of it."
"It feels lifeless," Barrent said.
Dravivian turned to Barrent and smiled. "Yes, that's a good word
for it. Self-involved might perhaps be better. This is a high-status
room, Barrent. A great deal of creativity has gone into the artistic
improvement of ancient archetypes. My family has re-created a bit
of the Spanish past, as others have re-created bits of the Mayan,
Early American, or Oceanic past. And yet, the essential hollowness
is obvious."
UNOFFICIAL
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Notice: If you have received this email by mistake, please advise
the sender and delete the message and attachments immediately. This email,
including attachments, may contain confidential, sensitive, legally privileged
and/or copyright information. Any review, retransmission, dissemination
or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the
intended recipient is prohibited. DIBP respects your privacy and has
obligations under the Privacy Act 1988. The official departmental privacy
policy can be viewed on the department's website at www.immi.gov.au. See:
http://www.immi.gov.au/functional/privacy.htm
---------------------------------------------------------------------