akhare

Why on Earth would anyone want to ban a method that actually makes it easier for the opposition to compete? Opening 1S = a minor might make it slightly difficult to introduce S, but you can easily rectify that by using X = S and cue bid of the anchor as a TOX....

IMO, the real slippery sliding slope for ACBL is losing the support of relatively younger players like me. Granted, I am in the minority, but I know several others who are in the same boat. If they don't deem it fit to approve fairly innocous methods (belaboured opinions to the contrary notwithstanding), then it probably isn't worth supporting being a member of such the organization. If, as has been suggested, transfer openings cause big time related problems when they are introduced, then do go ahead and take steps to rectify it. However, don't ban the methods on the out of hand assumption that it will be the case. In other words, allow us room to breathe (bridge wise) and we'll all be happier for it...

I can't help but think that the ACBL does a disservice to its members, especially those who sometimes play in other jurisdictions by severely restricting a method that is commonly played at all levels in most of the rest of the world. Yup -- I am becoming increasingly ambivalent about my renewing my ACBL membership, thanks to the draconian system regulations. On one hand, I would like to support them for obvious reasons, but the absurd convention card regulations have really been bothering me...

I voted for > 8 board team matches. However, poll results notwithstanding, I doubt that such methods will ever be permitted in ACBL-land...

I distinctly remember reading somewhere that Martson switched a 1♣ Moscito coz of regulations against FP (and that he would rather play the other version any given day). Your system sounds very similar to the one that Todd and I play on BBO. We aren't that brave and use a 1♥ fert. Also, we started off playing FP at all vul. but switched over a mixed system because it seemed too risky for team games. Did you find that the fert sometimes caused your side as much nuisance as it did the opps? It's easy to deal with it as the responder if your hand is especially strong or weak, but the 13-16 range can cause headaches...

I'm rarely the first to defend Microsoft but I think what they have done here is sensible and it should really be regarded as a minor issue/bug/feature with the BBO Windows client. Also, applications weren't really supposed to write per-user configuration information to the "Program Files" anyway. This was poorly documented and wasn't enforced until Vista. On Vista, writes to the directory now require Admin privileges. Since most programs execute with limited privileges by default (which is a very good thing BTW), the VirtualStore allows non-conforming legacy applications to work transparently.

I will likely be in the minority here, but I am running the 64-bit Vista (Longhorn) server on my machine and have been very happy happy with it. Vista isn't perfect, but SP1 goes a long way towards fixing many of most egregious problems.

I smell a conspiracy here :). The latest Microsoft MSDN magazine has a very good feature on a voting methods and one that satisfies the Condorcet technique as well: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/dd148646.aspx Condorcet Technique and Schulze Method The Condorcet technique for collaboratively determining the best option from a set of choices was developed primarily as a reaction to the head-to-head paring problem of the Borda count method. The Condorcet method is very simple. It requires evaluators to rank all alternatives, and then a comparison of the results between each possible pair of alternatives is performed. ... One of the most interesting systems that satisfies the Condorcet principle has a variety of names, including the Schulze method, the clone-proof Schwartz sequential dropping technique, and the beat-path method. I will call this technique the Schulze method.

Unless declarer has made a claim, declarer should be allowed to retract the cards without any procedural penalty. The defenders should be glad that they can defend the hand in DD (assuming they remember the cards and haven't already blown it on the opening lead)...

I would have voted for Nader, too. In fact, I have in the past. But, this year I wanted my vote to count, even if it just added to the margin of victory. Have you seen his post-election "Uncle Tom" interview comments? That might cure you from any temptation to ever vote for him again :) I was cured of that temptation after Florida 2000 :(....

Economic Left/Right: -6.75 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.10 Guess I am another Gandhian :)?

By your argument No <women / group of choice> are allowed to vote constitutes equal right too -- correct?

Coming from a place (India) with more repressive attitudes and laws, I have seen firsthand instances where gay men married women just to conform to societal expectations. The outcome was (predictably) and tragically disastrous for both parties. Sadly, the outdated (Victorian) laws against "abhorent" behaviour (sic) are still on the books and are to date used to persecute and harass gays (mainly for monetary gain, but I can only imagine the the mental anguish, humiliation and suffering it causes). The Indian Supreme Court is considering a motion to rescind these laws, but the federal government appealed against it on the grounds that such laws for are required the "moral well being of the society!!!". The government's argument certainly sounds like an echo of the amusing/absurd one made by the original poster...

No one said that personal constitutional rights are abridged by virtue of opening a storefront. However, the the constitutional rights of the owner don't extend to the storefront by phantasmic projection. To that end, *it* is subject to arbitrary policy and licensing restrictions, and ensuing freedoms may be a small subset of your own personal freedoms. Will free markets eventually regulate themselves? Maybe they will, but I still don't understand why it isn't right to force the business to do something. For instance, government certainly can't force a restaurant owner to bathe, but the restaurant must adhere to the proscribed code of hygiene (I am being facetious here just in case someone is wondering).

Interesting -- can you please give some specific examples (historical or anecdotal) on the societal, genetic and evolutionary disadvantages that you have mentioned?

Perhaps you meant to say "majority" instead of society because gays are very much part of the society. Secondly, as tax paying citizens, they have every right to voice their opinions in the matter. BTW, substituting "left handed" (or some other minority trait) instead of gay in your argument makes for a very interesting read...

I guess by that you mean that two men in a relationship can't reproduce. However, how different is that from saying that men can't reproduce on their own? Does the relationship suddenly develop a societal/evolutionary benefit if they hire a female surrogate for that purpose? What are the societal/evolutionary benefits from hetrosexual couples that can't reproduce? What about those hetrosexual couples that don't want to reproduce?

IMO, the pharmacy question is much more complicated than that. The personal freedoms enjoyed individuals are (and must be) different from those granted to the corporation. For example, in a state where the all pharamacies are owned by a single chain, should all people be denied the access to contraception because of the whims of its owner? What if the owner of such a pharmacy took a shine to the idea that some life saving medication was against a religious belief? The government has no right to challenge the owner's belief, but it has every right to insist that the pharmacy carry a certain brand of drugs in the interests of public and health and well being.

You must have been living in a cave working on Moscito or something. Surely you have heard about the flouride in the water and its effects on our precious bodily fluids :) (with apologies to Dr. Strangelove).

i think in the case of abortion and marriage, liberals would want the choice to be PERSONAL, not a choice made by any sort of random government, religious or social organization. it really is none of your business if a woman chooses to have an abortion or if two people of the same gender want to live together and be entitled to the same legal protections as people of the same gender. what gives YOU the right to dictate how others are to lead their lives? I find it absolutely amazing that the religious right imposes its own morals and ideals on everyone. When will you realize, that if you are right about the existence of your particular deity (whichever one it is that you might believe in) then you don't NEED to do anything about other people on Earth as your own belief (usually) spells out that the deity will punish the non-believers. why can't you just let others live happy and fulfilling lives? Well said Matmat -- pretty much echoes my own views.

We are talking about two slightly different things here. Flash is a browser plug-in that can be used to write cross platform browser based client side applications. Java refers to a language that can be used to write both client and server side applications. Java programs are translated into byte code and run on top of a JVM (Java Virtual Machine) that can be hosted on a variety of platforms. The initial purported purpose of Java was indeed to cross browser and cross platform applications (using AWT, SWING, etc), but its use of late is largely on the server platforms.

Andrew Sullivan had an series of interesting articles about prop 8 (among other things): http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...ns-vs-gays.html http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/.sha...07/tt081107.jpg Massively funded by the Mormon church, a religious majority finally managed to put gay people in the back of the bus in the biggest state of the union.

Thanks for confirming that vegans like me do exist. It appears that "Palindrones" -- people who will continue to put forth vacuous arguments about her qualifications vis-a-vis Biden exist too. i haven't seen any vacuous arguments about her qualifications re: biden... can you point some out to me? I wasn't referring to the arguments put forth on this forum. Just try searching for "Palin vs. Biden experience" or better still "Palin vs. Obama" and you will get an idea of what I am talking about. If you think that's the work of loony fringe elements, try listening to "Mr. noun-verb-9/11"'s annunciations on the topic...

I don't know whether this helps, but we play the following (Moscito-like) structure over 1♠ showing 5+♦s: 1N: Forcing 1 round, doesn't necessarily promise GF strength 2C: 5+ ♥, constructive, forcing 1 round 2D: 5+ ♦, constructive, forcing 1 round After opener's response to 1N (typically 2♣ / 2♦), 2♥ is the GF relay. BTW, in ACBL-land, the 1N response can't be GF, but it's OK as long as it doesn't *promise* inv+ values. You can probably get by if you play 2♣ / 2♦ as constructive NF bids. After 1♥ - 1N: 2♣: 4+ ♣s or any balanced hand 2♦+ -> naturalish The cheapest bid by responder continues the relay and relay breaks are invitational...

I agree. How about we call them Palin-drones.... ;) I second that -- I already proposed that in another thread -- basically, incorrigible supporters who strongly resist suggestions of non-qualification, evidence notwithstanding...