Elianna

I don't know the Spanish term, but a prime number is a whole number that is only divisible by itself and one. Oh wait, http://math2.org/math/spanish/eng-spa.htm#P says that it is el número primo.

Why can I only agree with ten posts/day? And if there is a limit, why can't I go and undo some of my "likes" when I find a post that was better than my previous top ten? Am I expected to read everything and then pick out the best 10? This is pretty silly, and having a limit is even sillier! Normally I barely use 3 a day (and only on those days when I bother reading the forums, which is actually down to many fewer days than it used to be since the new interface was introduced, which was a new subject) but sometimes I read more and wish to use it more! I just don't understand why there's a limit. Is it really a concern that someone will state that they like a lot of posts? Why would that matter?

That's the price per dozen.

I do understand what hubris means, but I don't understand what you mean. Who do you think was displaying it, the team that played ineligible players, or the team that filed the challenge?

I sent email to setgame at setgame dot com (their contact us on their website) and received:

It seems that we could never find you or anyone else so we have to forfeit.

I'll ask him. I'm sure that we can find three colors that he could differentiate, but wouldn't that be really expensive? And even if it wasn't, I might have a problem with a copy shop being worried about it violating copyright.

I used to play it a lot. It's a really fun game for those who can tell the colors apart. Unfortunately Adam can't, and so I don't have much of an opportunity to play it anymore and am rusty.

I am online now, and will stay on for about an hour. Tomorrow I take a huge test, so I don't know if we can do it tomorrow. We will be available anytime after 10am (counting time change) on Sunday (have no plans except writing papers).

I very much preferred to do it than have my screenmate: they usually tried to use force to get it to stay up (instead of just letting it snap), or let it slam down.

Will anyone be available Tuesday Nov 2 in the evening on the American West Coast? I don't know what time Adam will be available, but it will have to end before 9pm.

This forced seating arrangement also wasn't a requirement at ACBL mixed pairs that I've played in.

I don't like the idea that there is a quota on like/dislike votes. When I noticed that the forums was going to be changed, I really hoped it would be like my favorite forums. What I really like about it is a bunch of buttons on the bottom of each post:educational, interesting, funny, agree, disagree, love. So basically every post was like a poll. It really helped get a consensus of what is going on. I think that agree/disagree would be much more relevant than like/dislike (it's less clear what one "likes" about a post, than whether someone agrees or disagrees).

I already hate it.

Personally, I have more trouble with the decks that have spades and clubs both black, but the clubs are faded (so kinda gray) than with normal decks. It's basically my fault, because the cards trick me into complacency, and my mind treats the clubs like washed out spades. It DOES make sure that I never get hearts and diamonds mixed up, though (my mind doesn't mix red and orange together). I also tend to doubt that this would prevent most revokes. From when I direct, most revokes tend to happen pretty equally between: suits mixed together card hidden behind another card card lost on the ground card lost in some other way (left in board, played to a trick, etc) Revoker does not know what suit was led In my experience, at our club, it's the last one that causes the most revokes, with a hidden card second-most. And different colors is not going to stop people from doing either of these. If your solution completely solved the first problem, I would say you should go for it, because at least it minimizes revokes, but as I mentioned, for me at least, it makes me MORE likely to mix the black suits together. I'm also rather curious about what you mean by "revokes plague your club"? (though this is might be a different topic and if you'd prefer to move it to PMs to avoid a hijacking I'd understand). Do you mean that many people revoke and are upset at themselves and you're trying to help them, or that there are a few people that revoke constantly, and they annoy everyone else at the club, and you are trying to solve that problem? (Not criticizing either one, just curious)

Adam and I just saw "Waiting for Superman". It was interesting, but had some suspicious statistics, and also stated that only 20% of charter schools are successful, yet seemed to be pushing charter schools as the way forward in education. And demonized teacher's unions, perhaps somewhat deservedly, but not completely deservedly.

It isn't, as I just posted in reply to Chris. :blink: As to your second question, NO! Using PPs to "adjust" the score is anathema. No, assigning a score to punish behavior is wrong. I'm suggesting you first deal with the score you feel they should earn, and THEN, if you feel the behavior was incorrect, you punish the behavior. These are two separate issues.

If you train the players to look at them, bridgemates can actually save the day, as they will say which pair should be playing which board.

If you are supposed to go to a table, but it starts the next round 5 minutes early and finishes a board incorrectly before you get there, how is it your fault? And if the director DOES rule that it's your fault, can't they take care of that with a PP?

This is what I would have done, and what ACBLscore allows. I believe that your solution CANNOT be done on ACBLscore. As far as I know you cannot make it take a score for someone that was not designated to play that board, and if you edit the movement (which is what it sounds like the director did initially), then it will not accept a score for 9NS, and they clearly deserve an A+ according to 15B.

There's a club around here that does other things like forbidding preempts on less than 5 cards. They used to have a policy about opening 1NT with a singleton, but I don't remember if they still do. These policies were posted on the wall, but no mention of penalties was made. Also, they used to have another policy that if you were a director and playing in the game, you couldn't call the director. This always seemed backwards to me (seemed to encourage people to make rulings at the table), but I think that the idea was that it was supposed to foster a friendly place, so as a director if someone led out of turn for example, you were supposed to just let them take it back. Again, the club has changed ownership since then, and I am no longer a director there, so I haven't been in the backroom and don't know if they still have that policy. I do know that the club is doing something right, as they always have two sections in their afternoon games, whereas my club only consistently does that on one day.

I did things in the wrong order. I checked 2005, and then looked when I joined the forums, and that said 2004. And I think that I joined BBO before I joined the forums, so I should have checked 2004. Oh well.

1) There are a lot less pay phones now then there used to be, making it harder to do things like meeting up with nonbridge playing local friends or calling a taxi after the game unless you have your cell phone on you. So you bring your cell phone to do this, and so you need a place to put it if you are not allowed to have it on your person. 2) Because everyone has cell phones, there is now a much higher level of expectation of being available then there used to be. For example, 20 years ago if my principal called me with a question while I was away, she would have expected to wait until I came back for an answer. Now she expects a response within a few hours (ie after the session is over). It's not that anwer is ESSENTIAL, it's just that employers have an expectation of a timely response, and their expectation has changed over the years. And telling them to change their expectation is not an option. 3) Jdonn had a very good response in one of the other threads but I forgot exactly what he said and he's too talkative for me to find it easily right now. Maybe gwnn can or Josh can repost.

I specifically did not wish to refight the question of whether they are allowed or not, I just wanted the information of where to look for where to place them. And those are related to Nationals, not something run by WBF/USBF, so I just wanted to confirm that they, too, are providing a check-in place.

Thank you. This won't likely be a problem the first day, so I can investigate then and worry about it the second day.