TimG

My partner and I are looking for a host for round 4. We're available this evening and Sunday morning eastern time. Please let me know if you can host one of those times. Thanks.

Thanks. I was looking for a button on one of their posts or something in their profile. And, it does appear to work, I don't see the most recent post from someone I ignore tested.

I think someone said there is now an "ignore" feature. How does it work?

Assigned seating is sexist, but a mixed event is not?

Oddly, I have such buttons for most posts, but not all. (I'm using Firefox.) Diana_eva's post being one of the posts for which there is no "+/-". Edit: I'm guessing it is a yellow/admin thing -- no voting up or down on the the officials.

This has been discussed elsewhere, it must be done by hand.

The issue is that the add-on hasn't been updated to run on the newer version of FF -- at least that is how I understand it -- so you'll be able to run it with 3.6, but not som eof the newer 4s.

Yep, multiquote doesn't work unless you click multiple multiquote buttons. Was not obvious to me either. What is this "fast reply" that a couple of people have mentioned and how does it differ from just clicking on the "add reply" button at the bottom of the list?

A major problem is not required in order to hinder the approval of a method, often minor problems will suffice. Especially when there is a bias against the method. In the case of "unusual" methods, there is an extra burden on the user for proper disclosure. I agree with you that this should be addressed through application of disclosure rules, but the reality is that this sort of consideration is used by the C&C Committee when making decisions about allowing methods. Standard should be part of "general bridge knowledge". Where there are subtle nuances involved, the practitioners of the method often are not aware of them. How can they disclose things of which they are unaware? Perhaps the same can be said of Multi when it is in common use, but again, in ACBL, the practitioners of special methods have an added burden of understanding and disclosure. I believe that some players would like to regulate against any method, even standard methods, which the practitioners cannot adequately disclose. Unfortunately for them, that would leave some pairs playing no methods. I do not mean to argue the merits of such positions. My original point was that when someone says "LOLs [here] deal with Multi all the time, it is beyond me why they can't in the ACBL" or similar, they are not really addressing the issues that are important to those with the power to allow Multi in more events.

It is thought that Multi will always add a random element. So?

In North America, I do not think it is the average club player who is opposed to Multi but rather the top experts. They have a few concerns, but a couple are: 1) the average player won't be able to defend against Multi well and will thus hand out random tops to those who employ multi; and 2) it is often difficult to get adequate disclosure from those who use multi, particularly about when they might pass 2D.

Your post consisted of three lines of text (in my view) and about twice that in vertical whitespace because of groups, posts, joined, gender, location and interests along with "limit bidder" a row of dots and a couple if icons. All that stuff makes for lots of vertical empty space. I think it would be nice if the default was not to show most of those things. (But, nice to have them in the profile...which you can see when you click on a name or otherwise ask to see a profile.)

I don't know whether Drury is part of SAYC, but in the absense of Drury would P-1♥-2♣-2♥ be forcing? P-1♥-2♣-P is certainly a possible auction.

Ahh, I read this to mean that in previous runnings of this event, the conditions of contest called for a round robin, not that in earlier stages of this event there had been a round robin.

Not only is there an intervening double, but responder is a passed hand; I do not expect passed hand competitive bidding agreements to be "2/1". Aside: I wanted to quote the original auction, but could find no convenient way to do so.

After clicking on one of the suit symbols the cursor disappears. That is, if I click on a suit symbol and then keep typing nothing happens, I have to reposition the cursor after clicking on the suit symbol. I do not recall this working the same way in the old forum, I think after clicking on a suit symbol no cursor repositioning was needed to continue with the message.

I agree: not sure why 3♥ should be forcing after a natural 2♣, but think there may be logical alternatives even if it is non-forcing. However, I doubt very much doubt that I would pursue the matter in a club game.

A three-way lasts two round so each match involves the same number of boards as a head-to-head match -- no need for any VP scaling. As a participant, I'd much rather a three-way to a bye. Why sit out a round? Especially when not every team will get a bye. What is the rationale behind the switch from round robin to Swiss? It seems to me much better to have a complete round robin rather than have each team miss a single other team.

If you were to ask my parents, they'd tell you I am a "computer folk"; if you were to ask my kids, their opinion would be quite different. I don't like large fonts. I like fonts that the user can set: the reader rather than the writer ought to determine the size of the font they are seeing. Isn't the size of the font dependent upon the size and resultion of the reader's monitor? I have not seen any messages with light blue text on a gray background. But, perhaps my eyes are simply not sensitive enough to tell the difference between light blue and black (or dark gray).

I haven't attempted to input a hand so I can't comment on that, but I do not like the end result. I'd much rather the diagram be text and have the same background color as the rest of a post.

For quite a while there was no auto-redirect, so I expect lots of us were unaware that the new forums were functioning. I also expect that the unfamiliarity of it all is slowing people down.

Thanks. Do we have to manually nest quotes?

It sounds to me like you are ignoring the double and treating 2♣ as GF. I think that is far from standard. Even if you have the agreement that 2♣ is forcing over a double, that generally only means for one round so that a raise to 3♣ or a 2N rebid would be non-forcing. If you treat 2♣ as forcing, then I would rebid 2N with any balanced minimum (without club support) without much regard for major suit stoppers.

How does "MultiQuote" work. Nothing seems to happen when I click on the button. In the previous forum, when I clicked "mark this forum read" i was taken back to the main index, now I appear in the forum just marked as read. I can't find a preference option that would change this, but I might just not be looking in the right place.

I agree that something should be done to set the pinned posts apart from the rest. The light green "pinned" isn't bold enough for my, especially when a light green "poll" appears in the same area.