Leaderboard

I disagree. You want to find the spade fit if you have one. If 2nt denies spades this is going to lead to the wrong contract if partner has them. Don't start breaking partnership principles of how to bid your shape just because you regret opening and are slightly light. 2S is a reverse by definition, but partnerships can agree that it doesn't show extras, then it would be fine (but it's still a reverse, not "not a reverse". It just wouldn't show any extra strength). If you choose to have a reverse promise extras (which has pros and cons, sorting out extra strength even in a 2/1 sequence is still useful and necessary eventually, maybe it can be delayed until round 3 though on spade/heart hands), then I don't see anything wrong with 2H. If you are playing a catch-all 2H, you'd do it routinely with hands like this or stuff like AQJ Jxxxx xxx KJ, not wanting to rebid 2nt with diamonds wide open. Partner should absolutely not presume a good suit for a 2H rebid if playing such a style, it shouldn't "seem wrong" at all, it's routine and frequent. It's possible to play 2H as promising a good suit, but then the lack of definition simply shifts to other rebids; 2nt might now be wide open somewhere, and/or raising to 3c can be very wide ranging in both strength and shape which can be difficult to sort out especially if 2c itself is being played as possibly nebulous (2+ cds, 3+cds) as is frequently done these days. I also wouldn't open, but I don't think the rebid is the problem. It's more that too many points are in a doubleton diamond, not worth as much as a hand with more points in long suits. Rather open with the KH than KD. As for auction, having opened, I would want something like 1h-2c-2s-3c-3nt-4nt-all pass.

Now that I've opened, I think 2NT is best I don't want to encourage in the majors at all Vulnerability may have influenced my opening but not once I've opened, I'm going to be trying to put on the brakes

It might be that the Legislature in the USA shirks away from its responsibility to legislate, especially on controversial issues. It seems they prefer to use wedge issues to raise bucketloads of political donations (and consequently get reelected) than to resolve said wedge issues.

You can in some sports at least. Lance Armstrong was stripped of his seven TDF titles after he was found to have been doping. It is not unreasonable to take titles off sports participants if they have later been found to have cheated.

You can not change history, or its records imo. But you can comment on events afterwards. The wiki entry below that I found mentions this book, so the cheating allegations are there for all to see. It was wrong to cheat, but altering facts and records is 'cheating history' also. The Blue Team have been found 'with their pants down' and that is enough imo. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Team_(bridge)