Elianna

I completely agree with you. That article was making it about the parents, not the child. The one thing I will say, is that it is likely that the fact that the parents have had to think about their own sexuality (unlike most heterosexual people, who are not confronted by their differences as a matter of course in society) are more open to their child having alternate thoughts. I don't think that giving the child puberty-delaying drugs is abuse by any means. In fact, I might be more convinced that NOT giving THIS child puberty-delaying drugs is abuse. This way he has more time (and hopefully more cognitive growth and therapy) to work out what is the right choice for him.

I think that it's perfectly valid to say "I'm sorry, I don't understand your explanation. Are you saying that she must have exactly two?" Or perhaps to be short "Chayav leyot bedyuk shneyim?"

Honestly, I would have interpreted your question as saying "one club must have two?" which I get that you interpreted as "only two", but my initial reaction was "at least two" (as opposed to one. I could have five, because that's having two.) I don't have a Hebrew keyboard, so please forgive my transliteration, but I would have asked "yacol leyot yoter m'shnei alim?" I agree that it could be RHO's issue with Hebrew, but it could also be that he's very literal, and thinking that if you have five clubs, then clearly you have two, and so therefore the answer to your questions was yes.

http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2010/04/alot-is-better-than-you-at-everything.html

This is not a recent movie, but I highly recommend "The Story of the Weeping Camel". It's a documentary dubbed in English, but for those of you still reading after that last phrase, it's a very touching movie. I loved it.

That's not true. I have no time to think about the hand, but these DD sheets NEVER rely on opponents doing the wrong thing. In fact, on these sheets opponents are always believed to do the right thing (they get to play DD) too.

That wasn't the debate. And as in my favorite partnership, we don't even play 1NT SF, I don't think that I'm the one needing convincing.

Thank you. The part I found especially revealing was That was the piece I was missing.

Aaah. Thank you. Now it makes total sense. I always assume matchpoints. In fact, I likely think matchpoints even if something said IMPs.

I don't understand something: The way I read this, is that the U.S. shut the company down, and is now prosecuting them for not being able to operate while being shut down. What am I missing?

Sorry, I may be being an idiot here, but aren't there cases where spades takes one more trick that it's a winner? (Like when 1NT=2, and 3S=3.) But I think that I see your point: One is on the three-level, when you could be on the one-level, especially if you can only take 8 tricks. And that when there's a three trick difference, it's better to be in spades. But what about a two trick difference? Wouldn't spades still be better? I don't disagree with you, btw, about it being better to be SF. I just wasn't following that one piece. The only 2/1 partnership I'm in plays it SF but we moved 3-card limit raises out of it. But I wonder if my partner would kill me when I strategically "forgot" with balanced hands? Probably so. Except when it works.

Necromancers of threads like this need a life.

This hand was really said at our table: 2♠ (DBL) 2NT (DBL) (alerted and explained as a relay to clubs) 3♣* (3♥) 4♠ (DBL) Pass (5♥) DBL all pass. Misdefended so allowed to make.

If you go to the ACBL webpage and search playing directors, you will find many regulations about specific games. The upshot is that in seems ok (but not recommended) for no more than 17 tables. See http://www.acbl.org/assets/documents/Handbooks/ACBL-Handbook-of-Rules-and-Regulations_Chapter-05.pdf page 4 for an example. For a STaC, if there are hand records, it seems that a playing director is not allowed. So it seems to be a problem at your club. (You could email ACBL and ask. This has had mixed results for me in the past.) It seems that your club needs to recruit some extra directors. If you had a playing director per section that seems to be allowed, so no one would lose the ability to play.

Since cursive isn't a state-mandated testing subject, it isn't taught anymore. Don't you love the educational testing regime?

My sister slept through the Northridge quake. I tried waking her up, because her bed is right by the window, but I couldn't, and so tossed a blanket over her, got under a desk, and then the shaking stopped.

Adam and I have a different structure of Gazilli when we open 1S vs. when we open 1H (and not just with 2NT). When we open 1S 2NT shows 5-5 GF. When we open 1H, 2NT is artificial forcing showing 6+H and a 4+ minor with about 14-16 hcp 5 losers. Over this, 3C asks (3D=diams 3H=clubs). Before we switched to have a different structure after 1S opening, we used the second meaning for 2NT.

XM Radio - On Broadway. I have pretty low brow taste! :)

I agree if someone was posting "I have Axx AJxx AKx xxx, what do I open in SAYC" in the A/E subforum, perhaps they should be pointed at the B/I subforum (or their thread moved there). The problem is that any kind of suggestion (even politely worded) to that effect is taken by some people as an insult, because people have differing ideas of what A/E means. Probably the best is to just report it, and not engage, but that's quite hard to do. Also, re: the cliques. Of course people are friends with each other. Everyone is human. And of course it feels awkward as a new person. But I don't think that cliques are that prevalent or that overwhelming.

We already had a debate about the "wtp" posts. I believe that those of us who didn't like them stated our reasons/requests for longer posts, but I hope that we weren't annoying about it (although our idea may have been annoying to others, I understand). It's one thing replying to a three letter post by politely asking the person to elaborate, and it's another to make a passive-aggressive bitch fest that really doesn't elicit a response. At least not a useful one. I don't really feel I have a dog in this particular fight. But if we're voting people off the forums, I have a different candidate. And now I'm going to give others advice that I keep giving myself, and while I'm usually good at following it, I've clearly broken it a few times in the past: DON'T ENGAGE WITH THE CRAZIES! Also, in even more seriousness, a better search function, and perhaps a quiz based on the search function before people can post (so that they know to search for old topics before having yet ANOTHER ratings thread started by a newbie) would help even more. It would help with pile-ons of newbies who post things that are new to them (5 card majors can open NT? AMAZING!) and also could be engineered to show different parts of the forum, so newbies could get more of an idea of what goes where. I might even be willing to help work on this treasure hunt, though I do think that Gwnn might be the best candidate to work on this.

qft!

You know, in other circumstances, I could see someone trying to use hand 1 as evidence of c***ting. In fact, I know of a case where a similar hand WAS used in a hearing about c***ting. Not to say OP was (I hope that if he was he wouldn't post), but some people on the committee thought that it was a reasonable psych, and others thought it was unheard of, but I guess here's OP to show that someone else thought of something like that.

Where are negative votes when they are needed?

I would enjoy that if it was college. You wouldn't even have to score it, there are multiple places that would do this for free. I used to have a group on yahoo all the time. I wonder why I stopped. I may look into that again.

Funny enough, it hasn't. They become better teachers after working for three years, and then quit teaching. Coincidentally, others also become better teachers after teaching for three years. I also question that being in TFA means that someone is smarter. But I also know that I have many different ideas of intelligence than the average person.