glen Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 ...And in response to the question about the cell phone ban and the USBF Trials... From the picture in the USBF bulletins, it appears the USBF had a Electronics Jan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 A cell phone ban was enforced for the last 3 (or perhaps 4, I've forgotten) rounds of the Vanderbilt in Detroit, with no problems. Why does everyone always say "with no problems"? With all due respect, someone left their phone behind, and many other people were probably inconvenienced. If they didn't complain that doesn't mean it wasn't a problem for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geller Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 A cell phone ban was enforced for the last 3 (or perhaps 4, I've forgotten) rounds of the Vanderbilt in Detroit, with no problems. Why does everyone always say "with no problems"? With all due respect, someone left their phone behind, and many other people were probably inconvenienced. If they didn't complain that doesn't mean it wasn't a problem for them.It would be nice if there had ben a questionnaire survey of the affected players in Detroit to get some objective data on opinions regarding the new rule. Was this done? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 A cell phone ban was enforced for the last 3 (or perhaps 4, I've forgotten) rounds of the Vanderbilt in Detroit, with no problems. Why does everyone always say "with no problems"? With all due respect, someone left their phone behind, and many other people were probably inconvenienced. If they didn't complain that doesn't mean it wasn't a problem for them.It would be nice if there had ben a questionnaire survey of the affected players in Detroit to get some objective data on opinions regarding the new rule. Was this done? I hope you are not trying to imply that the ACBL cares about the opinions of its members who are not in power. Blasphemous... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geller Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 A cell phone ban was enforced for the last 3 (or perhaps 4, I've forgotten) rounds of the Vanderbilt in Detroit, with no problems. Why does everyone always say "with no problems"? With all due respect, someone left their phone behind, and many other people were probably inconvenienced. If they didn't complain that doesn't mean it wasn't a problem for them.It would be nice if there had ben a questionnaire survey of the affected players in Detroit to get some objective data on opinions regarding the new rule. Was this done?I like the odd snark myself now and then, but may I suggest you use a scalpel rather than a sledgehammer. I'm sure the ACBL people care about member opinion but like any organization run by human beings things don't always work perfectly. Also, there are lots of different groups and it's hard to please everyone. If you feel a mistake has been made there are lots of channels, formal and informal, for trying to input your point of view. I know it can be frustrating at times but you catch more flies with honey rather than vinegar.... or something like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdonn Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 A cell phone ban was enforced for the last 3 (or perhaps 4, I've forgotten) rounds of the Vanderbilt in Detroit, with no problems. Why does everyone always say "with no problems"? With all due respect, someone left their phone behind, and many other people were probably inconvenienced. If they didn't complain that doesn't mean it wasn't a problem for them.It would be nice if there had ben a questionnaire survey of the affected players in Detroit to get some objective data on opinions regarding the new rule. Was this done?I like the odd snark myself now and then, but may I suggest you use a scalpel rather than a sledgehammer. I'm sure the ACBL people care about member opinion but like any organization run by human beings things don't always work perfectly. Also, there are lots of different groups and it's hard to please everyone. If you feel a mistake has been made there are lots of channels, formal and informal, for trying to input your point of view. I know it can be frustrating at times but you catch more flies with honey rather than vinegar.... or something like that. This is a forum for me to vent / pretend I'm funny. I did write a letter to the CEO, I'm not sure what other lengths you want me to go to without using more time and effort than is warranted. If you want me to state it explicitely: I believe they do not care about anything as a group other than making those in power happy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmar Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 A cell phone ban was enforced for the last 3 (or perhaps 4, I've forgotten) rounds of the Vanderbilt in Detroit, with no problems. Why does everyone always say "with no problems"? With all due respect, someone left their phone behind, and many other people were probably inconvenienced. If they didn't complain that doesn't mean it wasn't a problem for them. The world is full of inconveniences, we learn to take them in stride. And someone leaving their phone behind is their own fault. Did anyone miss any critical phone calls because they didn't have their cell phones with them? THAT would be a real problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
h2osmom Posted June 7, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 If we go to the WBF website, photo gallery, page 7, there is a photo of Welland, standing next to a screened table, talking on a cell phone. What should I make of this? Am I seeing it wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbforster Posted June 7, 2008 Report Share Posted June 7, 2008 If we go to the WBF website, photo gallery, page 7, there is a photo of Welland, standing next to a screened table, talking on a cell phone. What should I make of this? Am I seeing it wrong?Prima facia evidence of his cheating under the ACBL's Old World Order. After extensive committee meetings and a slander lawsuit filed against the ACBL, everything will be hushed up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffford76 Posted June 9, 2008 Report Share Posted June 9, 2008 I sent the following email to both my district representative and Jay Baum: I am extremely disappointed by the recent decision to ban cell phones at NABC's and hope to see it reconsidered. The benefits of a security policy should outweigh its costs. In this case the security benefits have been wildly overestimated. There are many ways to cheat at a tournament if one is so inclined, especially at one in which boards are not played simultaneously. Given that cell phone communication requires a collaborator, any message you could receive by cell phone could just as easily be communicated in the bathroom, in the hallway, or even by leaving a message from a pay phone on a home answering machine. In fact I don't see *any* security improvement. In addition it appears the costs have been underestimated. I don't care about the ability to have a phone during the sessions, but I care a great deal about having it between sessions. At such a large site the ability to make dinner and other plans is greatly enhanced by having a cell phone. Many people also need to be easily reachable for work or family reasons. I will not be staying at the host hotel in Las Vegas for cost reasons. It is thus not feasible to leave my cell phone in my room. I would prefer not to leave it with a checking station. Will there be a guarantee that I will get it back? I am especially disappointed that a fee will be charged for this service that shouldn't be necessary in the first place. Finally I believe that this rule will be widely ignored. It is bad policy to make rules that are only sporadically enforced as it causes people to lose sight of the importance of other rules. I do not believe that if I carry a satchel or if a lady carries a purse with a cell phone inside it, especially if the battery is removed, that anyone will notice the violation. In short, the rule is ineffective, annoying, and unenforceable and should be overturned. I never received a response from the district representative (it's been several days) and received the following response almost immediately from Jay Baum: Dear Jeff:Thank you for your comments regarding the cell phone policy.We hope this policy will eliminate one of the avenues available for players to create an unfair advantage.While we know that enforcement will be no easier than enforcing speed limits , we do feel a mandate to take every step feasible to have a level playing field. Checking your phone will be very similar to checking a coat.The minor inconvenience , in the opinion of most , will be outweighed by protecting the integrity of the game. I do appreciate you taking time to send your comments.Kindest regards, I sent the following reply which received no response (after several days):I am disappointed in this response because I don't think you have addressed my main concern. It doesn't help to eliminate one way to cheat as long as there are other equally easy ways to cheat. It's especially bad when this is done with a policy that has high cost to those of us who are not cheating. I am also curious about "in the opinion of most". I was never asked my opinion on this matter, and I do not know of anyone who was. What group of people is encompassed in "most"? Finally it is insulting to use the phrase "minor inconvenience" in reference to a check station with a fee. I don't consider any charge to have access to my phone "minor". If you haven't done so I would highly recommend reading the book "Beyond Fear" by Bruce Schneier. It analyzes security/cost tradeoffs in several contexts. It's becoming increasingly clear to me that there will not be any response about who the "many" people are who want this ban. I strongly suspect that it has nothing to do with security, but is in place because of a desire to stop phones from ringing during events. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted June 9, 2008 Report Share Posted June 9, 2008 What is interesting is that Jay's tone and response is nearly the same in every single one of these letters. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he isn't having the responses to this issue 'ghost-written', but at a certain point, you'd think that the volume of letters would cause him to sway his personal opinion. I wonder how many 'letters' the board received prior to suggesting this ban. I can't help but feel this ban was a knee-jerk reaction to the grumblings of a few after the Women's BAM in SF. Correct me if I'm wrong, but was this ban even discussed before San Francisco? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pclayton Posted June 9, 2008 Report Share Posted June 9, 2008 Dear Mr. Baum: I am writing to you about the cell phone ban at the Las Vegas NABC. My understanding of the new rule is that if you carry a cell phone with you in the playing area, that an automatic penalty is levied. This applies only to NABC events. As I'm sure you've heard from others on this issue, I would will simply add my personal views. I am not staying at the Hilton. On many days, I will be playing three sessions. If I can't bring my cell phone with me, it means I am out of touch with my wife and three kids for about 16 hours. Getting away to nationals is already stressful enough on my family life. Not being able to call them between sessions creates additional stress. I don't know if you have children but they look forward to hearing from me during the day between sessions. This small gesture greatly mitigates the stress of my absence. I am sure many players share this sentiment. A drop-off location for phones looks good on paper, but will result in chaos when sessions get over. There seems to be some definite security issues as well. Do I want to trust my $400 phone in the hands of a stranger? I presume the ban on cell phones is a result of 1) other players being bothered, and 2) security issues. Re: 1) All the league really needs to do is enforce and bolster the current rules. When the rule was implemented about cell phones ringing in a playing area, directors would not hesitate to give a penalty. Now, cell phones regularly ring at regionals and no one says a word. Only if someone has the gall to answer the phone and talk does a director make an issue out of it, and I've seen penalties waived even in these instances. If this rule is enforced, cell phone abuse would be greatly reduced. Personally I think if a player takes a phone out of their pocket or purse during play, it should be an automatic penalty. There's simply no reason to have a phone out. Re: 2) I don't think this the ban will curb cheating, There are many ways to cheat between partners, and teammates that do not involve the use of cell phones. Personally I think the security issue is a 'red herring' for #1. I would suggest treating cell phones like cigarettes. If you use a cell phone inside the playing area, its a rules violation, much like if you lit up at the table or in the hallway. However, the mere possession of a phone (in the off position) in the playing area, should not constitute a violation, or even a presumption of guilt. Possession of a cell phone should be no more of a violation of the rules than possession of cigarettes in your pocket. Unfortunately, I think most players will ignore this ban and the directors will be caught in a very awkward position trying to enforce this rule. My guess is that they will let it slide or look the other way, if they think a player isn't doing any harm. Directors have enough to worry about without playing 'phone police'. The players that choose to abide by the ban will be very bitter when others have phones with them. Thanks for listening, and I hope the league will reconsider this ban. Phil Clayton And...just received this. (wow, he's fast) Phil:Thank you for your note.We will assess the electronic device issue after LV .I can't predict whether this will remain , be altered ,or discontinued.Happy to have to input.Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts.Kindest regards, Jay Baum, CEOACBL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted July 20, 2008 Report Share Posted July 20, 2008 For anyone who is still interested in this subject: The Bridge World posted a rather length Letter to the Editor on this subject in the August issues. The title of the letter is "Cell Block". It can be found on page 23. (I'd like to thank at the forum regulars who helped me organize my thoughts and compose the submission) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.