Break in Tempo Appeal

[bluejak]

Scenario one: Your committee has two members, plus a chairman. You discuss the case. The two members are split - one wants to uphold the table TD, the other doesn't. The chairman says "I agree with <pick one>". So you've "discussed", not taken a formal vote.

 

Scenario two: same committee, same case, same split amongst the two members. You take a formal vote, and the chair breaks the tie. This committee reports the same decision as in scenario one.

 

A difference that makes no difference is no difference.

Neither of these cases really happen in Committees I have been on. They both sound a pretty appalling way of deciding.

[blackshoe]

Neither of these cases really happen in Committees I have been on. They both sound a pretty appalling way of deciding.

Well, I imagine you've served on far more committees than I have, but if my case one is not a description of how committees decide, pray tell how do they?

[campboy]

The difference should be obvious. Suppose you do take a vote and the result is two for A, one for B. A "voting" committee has now arrived at an outcome. A "deciding" committee would probably continue discussing in the hope of reaching a unanimous decision; if they succeed the outcome might be A, B or something else.

 

The difference is important, particularly if Henry Fonda is on your AC.

[barmar]

Do ACs usually require unanimous agreement? I'm sure I've seen plenty of appeal reports where there were dissenting opinions.

[pigpenz]

Do ACs usually require unanimous agreement? I'm sure I've seen plenty of appeal reports where there were dissenting opinions.

not on the ones I have been on

generally they come to a consensus, and majority rules

[blackshoe]

The difference should be obvious. Suppose you do take a vote and the result is two for A, one for B. A "voting" committee has now arrived at an outcome. A "deciding" committee would probably continue discussing in the hope of reaching a unanimous decision; if they succeed the outcome might be A, B or something else.

 

The difference is important, particularly if Henry Fonda is on your AC.

If Henry Fonda is on your AC, you have bigger problems than this.

 

And if the "deciding" committee can't reach a unanimous decision? How long do you prolong the agony? How do you "decide" when to stop?

[bluejak]

On ACs I have been on, discussion has nearly always led to general agreement. People with dissenting views are either convinced by argument, or accept that while they believe they are right, accept they may not be.

 

Basically an AC can either take a vote and come up with a decision that may or may not be correct quickly, or discuss until general agreement is reached and be quite confident the conclusion is right.. I am pleased that most ACs I have been on prefer the second approach.

[aguahombre]

While eventual acquiescence without truly agreeing might be effective in keeping our "subjects" in the dark, I prefer to be enlightened by dissenting opinions. If there is, in effect, a 2-1 vote, browbeating one of them into submission doesn't make it a nonvote.

[pigpenz]

While eventual acquiescence without truly agreeing might be effective in keeping our "subjects" in the dark, I prefer to be enlightened by dissenting opinions. If there is, in effect, a 2-1 vote, browbeating one of them into submission doesn't make it a nonvote.

doesnt the ACBL site where they do the appeals for the Nationals show how people on the AC came to their conclusion.

Generally these AC are going on after midnight or between sessions, so they will come to an agreement within a reasonable amount of time.

after appearing you can generally just ask some of the members of the AC they will explain why they did what they did.

[aguahombre]

doesnt the ACBL site where they do the appeals for the Nationals show how people on the AC came to their conclusion.

Generally these AC are going on after midnight or between sessions, so they will come to an agreement within a reasonable amount of time.

after appearing you can generally just ask some of the members of the AC they will explain why they did what they did.

yep. and the on-line site for the casebooks is available, too. They keep promising it will be updated, but Spring 2011 is the most recent.

[jh51]

yep. and the on-line site for the casebooks is available, too. They keep promising it will be updated, but Spring 2011 is the most recent.

For what it's worth, I have a friend who works at ACBL headquarters whose responsibilites include overseeing the publishing the NABC casebooks. When she was hired last fall she found a backlog in this area. She explained to me that there are many steps along the way from the hand written notes the AC provides to the final published product. Lawyers, editors, and expert panelists can all introduce delays.

[aguahombre]

For what it's worth, I have a friend who works at ACBL headquarters whose responsibilites include overseeing the publishing the NABC casebooks. When she was hired last fall she found a backlog in this area. She explained to me that there are many steps along the way from the hand written notes the AC provides to the final published product. Lawyers, editors, and expert panelists can all introduce delays.

Yeh, I got that on a thread last summer; and that progress was being made. It hasn't taken a year and a half in the past, so they probably just lost interest.

[Trinidad]

Well, I imagine you've served on far more committees than I have, but if my case one is not a description of how committees decide, pray tell how do they?

I have served on a few committees and chaired a few too and none of them were decided the way you describe.

 

When there is a disagreement between members, we try to figure out what causes the disagreement. It could be a difference in interpretation of the facts. We will make sure that we get the facts clarified. The difference could be in the interpretation of the laws. We will get the TD to interpret the laws. And finally, there could be a difference in judgement.

 

It is very rare for good players to have entirely different judgement. In those cases, there are arguments for both positions and all members know most of them. Some individual members balance the arguments in favor of one position, other individual members balance the arguments in favor of the other. Then the question is how the AC -as a team- balances the arguments.

 

It may well be that one member is strongly convinced that he TD had it right and that the appeal doesn't have merit, while the three other members understood the TD decision, but they would have ruled differently. If you would take a vote, this would mean that the TD decision would be overturned.

 

But committees are not there for voting. They are there to solve the problem. And while voting may be fair, it rarely leads to a fair decision, most of the time it will lead to the dictatorship of the majority. So, instead of voting, the members discuss. The positions get closer to each other, because there is understanding for the arguments that are exchanged. This could mean that one or more of the members is convinced or it could mean that the positions drift closer to each other. In the last case, the decision could end up to uphold the TD decision, but to return the deposit.

 

This may seem like a 'compromise' at the end of a bargaining process (I'll give in a little if you give in a little), but it isn't. The members don't have anything to bargain, because they don't have anything at stake in the process. So they can freely discuss and come to a good decision based on the judgement of the entire AC, rather than on a tally of the judgements of its members.

 

Rik

[jh51]

Yeh, I got that on a thread last summer; and that progress was being made. It hasn't taken a year and a half in the past, so they probably just lost interest.

Not last summer - it was October.

[aguahombre]

Not last summer - it was October.

Well, excuse me. It still feels like summer here, in October.

[blackshoe]

Maybe so, but summer runs from June to August. October is fall, or autumn.

[jh51]

And the Summer 2011 casebook is now available on the ACBL website. Now you can start whining about Fall 2011.