jonottawa

I don't know if this has been linked already, but I liked this article. http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...ed=rss.jcarroll

Jon, I have not seen the posts that Uday deleted, I do not know the order in which they were deleted, and I do not know which deleted posts were innocent victims of Uday trying to shut down the thread in what sounds like a less than optimal way (from a software point of view I mean). However, I have enough confidence in Uday that I do not need to know. I trust his judgment. In fact, I have no doubt that he is better at dealing with obnoxious posters than I do. If I thought Uday made a mistake I would tell him about it privately. Your childish attempt to drive a wedge between me and Uday concerning a completely trivial issue is not going to work. Do you think I really care that your stupid question marks got deleted? Now please listen to this: Intentionally or not you manage to offend a lot of people. That causes problems for us. We do not like to prevent people from posting in Forums, especially people like you who seem to have a lot of time on their hands for posting and a lot of interesting things to say. But when we receive daily complaints about a particular contributor (as we do with you) there is only so long we can put up with it. Whatever benefit that our membership gains from your non-inflammatory posts is not sufficient to make up for the time we waste fielding complaints about your inflammatory posts. From my (perhaps biased) point of view, a clear majority of the posts you make could be reasonably be considered to be inflammatory. That is too much. So please try a little harder to control yourself and please stop asking for my opinions on things. If I feel like I have something to say about an issue I will say it. I do not need you to put me on the spot whenever it suits the convenience of the point you are trying to make. Fred Gitelman Bridge Base Inc. www.bridgebase.com Fred, I agree that my posts, while universally well within the rules of engagement here, tend to provoke people. If you had privately asked me to cool it, explaining that your time (or Uday's time, or whoever's time) is being wasted, I would have been happy to do so. This is the first I've heard of daily complaints, I presume you must have found them groundless. Instead, a completely innocuous post of mine is deleted by Uday. Without explanation or warning. Other subsequent posts are allowed to stay in the thread, unless they reference my missing post. That's just not cool. I suspect you know that. If you think I'm trying to 'drive a wedge' between you and Uday, you are mistaken. He's been with you through the lean years, working for very little or nothing, as I understand it, and you guys are probably good friends. Whereas you barely know me. I'll post significantly less here, if only to save you guys the trouble of responding to my fan club. I would like to ask you a small favor: Could you please let me have my Leniency Petition thread back? I don't like the petition being run under an anti-USBF banner when it's not an anti-USBF petition. The other thread can be deleted or can merely be allowed to drop off the recent threads page like all other old threads. I don't care which. Thank-you. P.S. How's Sheri? I haven't heard her name since the Bill Gates announcement. I hope she's well, please send her my regards.

Anyway, this is much ado about nothing provided it doesn't happen again. Edit: Just read Dave's post above and this doesn't look like much ado about nothing at all. Fred, please weigh in ASAP. Uday, next time please give me the benefit of the doubt. Thanks. Fred, if you think my post was worth deleting, or even came close, please say so here. Thanks. I'm gonna go work out. Catch y'all later.

We agree!!! Christ, now someone's hacking into kenrexford's account. There's a post saying he agrees with me about something! :)

The paragraph I objected to was the very last sentence of this post. http://forums.bridgebase.com/index.php?sho...ndpost&p=236343

I quoted another post (a paragraph I objected to) and typed: ????? I would have previously typed something explaining my objection, but apparently my tone makes certain people's heads explode and so in a good-faith effort to 'play nice' I left it at that. Does anyone else feel it's appropriate to start deleting posts like that or locking down threads because of that?

I made a post. Uday deleted it without explanation. I won't repeat the content here, lest he delete it again, but it was 100% appropriate, by anybody's standards, imo. I have yet to receive a public or private explanation.

Since the petition we ended up with isn't anti-USBF behavior at all, I think a new thread is in order, lest people be misled by the thread title. From the other thread: The petition is up at: http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/USBFVeniceCupTeam/ The petition is based on a letter written by Richard E. Willey, edited by Josh Donn. I don't think it would be fair to call it an anti-USBF petition. It's mainly just a 'let's put this behind us' petition. The text is as follows: We, the undersigned, are writing this petition to respectably request that the USBF ceases its attempts to punish members of the USA1 Venice Cup team. We believe that the controversy surrounding the sanctions has eclipsed the original incident. A politically charged battle that has rapidly spread into the mainstream media doesn't benefit anyone. We recognize that there is enormous controversy regarding the action of the USA1 team on the podium in Shanghai. However, the USBF Board had a number of alternative responses available which were more suited to the magnitude of the situation: 1. Noting that the behavior of the USA1 Team violated the WBF Code of Conduct. 2. Expressing regret toward the behavior of the USA1 Team and recognizing that the WBF might chose to impose sanctions. 3. Implementing its own Code of Conduct designed to avoid repeat incidents. The USBF BoD has the authority to take almost any action that it wants. However, the punishment should fit the crime, and we do not support the extremeness of the actions being considered toward the Venice Cup Team. Respectfully,

I have been silent since about the first few pages of the other thread because I am friends with some of the women on the team, and I don't think what they did was appropriate at that time (as I indicated at the time). My view is that they should get the equivalent to a slap on the wrist (or no sanction at all) since the punishment should fit the crime, and this thing has really been blown way out of proportion. I never thought that there should be serious blood drawn such as being banned from international competition. All that being said, I would not be willing to sign a petition at this time. So far, as far as I know, nothing has happened. No punishment has been handed out. I have faith that the punishment will end up fitting the crime, and I think any kind of petition is at the very least premature. I also believe that we do not know all the facts and that the people who will hand out punishment, if any, know more about the facts than us. I have no reason to think that their informed judgement will be worse than my uninformed judgement. I know that people are reading these threads and have a good idea of where everyone on this forum stands. I don't think anything else is necessary at this time. Not that I think you care but I really disagree with the way you handle yourself on these forums and I think that you should remember that people here are human beings, and that you are not being assertive, you are being aggressive and just plain rude. I would not mention this except that I know you (in the sense that I have met you, not that I "know" you), and although a bit on the rude side sometimes I think you are actually a good guy and misrepresenting yourself by the way you act on these forums, a bit like jdonn used to. Of course I don't know you very well, and maybe you aren't, and likely you don't care about what I'm saying. But I digress. I hate this 'let's psychoanalyse Jon' fetish that seems to periodically seize all-too-many people around here, but okay, I'll bite this time. Let's theoretically remove the vocal anti-board behavior people like me from the equation. Do you truly believe that with half the voices saying 'suspension for a year (or four) sounds right' and the other half of the voices saying 'I trust the board/panel to do the right thing' that the Board would now be backtracking as they are and poised to potentially do the right thing? I don't. I certainly don't pretend that I personally played a significant role in the outcome of this. But without loud and vocal support for the ladies and against the tactics/publicly discussed/leaked proposed punishment of the Board/Panel, this would certainly have ended badly. It still might. But I'm proud of the role I've attempted to play in heading off a disaster. I'm passionate about fighting/preventing injustice. If that comes off as rude, well, unlucky.

I am no English major but I have a university degree in English. It depends on how the speaker is thinking of the USBF; as a single entity (singular) or as a group of members (plural). Singular is probably more usual than plural, but this may be one of those British- English vs American-English dichotomies. So as I see it, you can use both as far as the USBF is/are concerned. The same applies to for instance companies and countries. USA lead/leads, Microsoft has/have. Take your pick. Roland Thanks.

Really! I'm not saying I don't believe you but that is extremely surprising to me. Can you prove it? Yes. http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0...7-ohio-3763.pdf The Ohio Supreme Court addressed in 2007 some of the more opbscure aspects of this, like whether the elements alleged on the citation would suffice under certain circumstances. But, the underlying discussion is good. Now, I cannot vouch for any other State, as I have not done the research for all 50 states. However, I could, for a nominal fee (just kidding), check to see for your State, if you want. --- Nope -- not bunk. How about citing a case where the speeder actually was acquitted /charges dismissed? I think you're way better off hoping that the officer doesn't show up for the court appearance than that you're going to be able to use this defense successfully.

Thanks Han, it was getting pretty lonely there. :)

USBF makes error in judgment and adopts foolish strategy after weeks of planning and discussion. Let's pretend it never happened. USA1 Venice Cup team makes error in judgment on the spur of the moment and commits a minor act of poor taste. Let's pretend we haven't made up our minds yet and then stick it to them like we've planned to do all along. Uh, no. Enough is enough already. Their rights to due process have been irreparably damaged. It is now impossible to get an impartial group to oversee the case. Dismiss the charges and move on.

Alright, it's up and running. Let me know if anyone has any problems. http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/USBFVen...Team/index.html I regret the inconvenient screen begging for money, but just click on back or close the window because by the time you get to that screen you've already signed the petition. Any English majors here? Is 'ceases' right or is 'cease' right. Cease sounds better, but ceases seems like it's right. "We, the undersigned, are writing this petition to respectably request that the USBF ceases its attempts to punish members of the USA1 Venice Cup team."

The donation thing is cheesy, but it doesn't stop you from signing. By the time you get to the donation screen you've already signed. It's not ideal, but I think it's better than hosting it here. As for the email spam problem, most people have an email address they use in situations like this (for me it's my hotmail account, which is loaded with spam and I use almost exclusively when I need to provide an email address to sign up for something.) I have no idea if these people will send spam or not. Emails are not publicly displayed, however, if that's a concern.

Alright, I'm registering on ipetitions.com (who knew there was such a thing?) and I'll keep you posted. Do you agree with the wording change I proposed or do you like what you'd already written? Once we post the petition, I'd rather not change the wording, even a little (duh.) Nobody knows all the facts. Sometimes you have to act on imperfect information. I believe I know enough of the facts to proceed. You can't stay in the tank forever.

Okay Fred, I thought you indicated a theoretical willingness to sign a petition here but I guess I misunderstood you. Josh, if you want to go ahead and start a thread that's fine. You probably should credit Hrothgar too. Otherwise I'll pull the trigger in 5 or 6 hours.

It's on the previous page, in Bye-law to Rule 41, page 81 of the hard copy document, page 82 of the electronic document (which treats the cover as page 1.) "Bye-law to Rule 41 1. Each IF establishes its sport’s own eligibility criteria in accordance with the Olympic Charter. Such criteria must be submitted to the IOC Executive Board for approval. 2. The application of the eligibility criteria lies with the IFs, their affiliated national federations and the NOCs in the fields of their respective responsibilities. 3. Except as permitted by the IOC Executive Board, no competitor, coach, trainer or official who participates in the Olympic Games may allow his person, name, picture or sports performances to be used for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games. 4. The entry or participation of a competitor in the Olympic Games shall not be conditional on any financial consideration."

Ya, I guess one problem with having it here is that there are surely some people here who prefer to remain anonymous (to keep their real life identity private,) even though they would be happy to sign a petition. I can always stick something up on my blog for those people if we don't figure out a better alternative. Anyway, if you want to start a petition thread Josh, be my guest. It'll probably get more signatures if you host it. Otherwise I'll wait a few hours (midnight my time, which is in 6 hours) to see if Fred is willing to sign on or what changes he would propose and then post one. I don't think it should have a poll. It should just have the wording of the petition, instructions, and a polite request for no disruption.

We could post it here, but I think there would be a bunch of disruptive posts, which would lessen its effectiveness (I don't know if deliberately sabotaging a petition thread would violate Uday's edict or not, would it?) Ideally each comment would just say Joe Blow ACBL# Atlanta, GA or whatever... and each person would post only once (if at all.) I could host it on my blog (and delete disruptive comments) but that wouldn't be my preference. I don't know where Justin is on this, maybe he could revive his blog for a day for this.

I'm down with that ... Fred? (Maybe change 'actions being taken' to 'actions being publicly suggested' or 'publicly considered' or something like that.) Should it be open to everyone or just ACBL members? An online petition open to everyone is gonna attract Mickey Mouse, Scooby Doo, etc.

Page 82

But, is it clear that the sign amounted to a "political demonstration"? If flag waving and anthem singing at the award ceremony does not amount to a political demonstration, I don't believe the sign does either. In theory, you're right, it's not at all clear that what the ladies did amounts to a political demonstration. In practice, when you can concede your opponent's strongest argument (Olympic Charter bans demonstrations) and use their own argument against them (Olympic Charter bans playing professionally) you win the argument much more painlessly. Hey, I might win me a spot on the US team after all if we start suspending everyone who violated the Olympic Charter.

That letter rocks. A few typos/glitches, but the message is spot-on.

Et tu Uday? :) So anyway, where were we? Ah, yes. The petition. I think borrowing some language from hrothgar's letter would be very helpful. We could also attach endorsements from prominent members of the game: 'Great idea. ... Good luck getting people to sign your petition. Good luck with your petition effecting change.' - Fred Gitelman What do you think? :D