[jonottawa]

Spoiler

Nothing to see here. Move along.

This was a thread I started to come up with a petition to resolve the Venice Cup controversy. We ended up with a great petition that called for an outcome exactly like what ended up happening. You can see it here: http://www.ipetition...FVeniceCupTeam/

Unfortunately, when I started a thread for that petition, which wasn't anti-USBF at all, the powers-that-be around here deleted it and forced us to continue using this thread, which has a very inaccurate title and doesn't relate to the petition we ended up using at all.

So that's why this thread is still around.

I think there should be a petition against the way the USBF is handling the 'we did not vote for Bush' incident.

The purpose of this thread is to offer proposed wording for said petition that most people can agree with. Once we narrow down the wording to a couple of alternatives, we can vote on the 'best' one in another thread and then hopefully a couple of prominent members of the bridge community can sponsor it.

If someone with more bridge experience, influence, or diplomacy than me wants to take this and run with it, be my guest, but I haven't seen anybody doing anything and so I've taken it upon myself to do so.

Edit: The petition is up at:

http://www.ipetition...FVeniceCupTeam/

The petition is based on a letter written by Richard E. Willey, edited by Josh Donn. The petition is categorically NOT an anti-USBF petition. Its 2nd signatory is Han Peters, who states below that he would absolutely NOT be willing to sign an anti-USBF petition. It's mainly just a 'let's put this behind us' petition. Unfortunately, when I started a new thread titled 'Petition of Leniency toward USA1 Venice Cup team' it was deleted. A request to be allowed to revive that thread is pending.

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,

[mike777]

Again it would help if you specify exactly how the USBF is handling it. Thank you.
It makes it easier to decide to be for or against it then.

[cherdano]

I think a petition is ill-advised. We only heard indirectly about sanctions that the lawyer Allan Falk hired by the USBF BoD suggested. We do not know for sure that the forwarded e-mail is original. We do not know for sure whether the suggested punishment was Allan Falk's idea or really had the majority support of the USBF BoD. We do not know anything about the discussions that happened in private between the USBF BoD and the VCT.
At the very least, a petition has to be based on uncontroversial fact. Pretty much the only usable facts are the USBF BoD meeting minutes, and the opinion piece by the BoD on the USBF website. While I disagree somewhat with big parts of that writeup, and strongly with a few parts, this can't be the main point of a petition.
Add to that that many bridge players apparently have opinion that the suggested sanctions are adequate. Of course I very much disagree with them, but it means that any such petition will probably be either extremely vague and small in target, or it would be controversial among many bridge players. In neither case would it do much.

Aside from that it may just lead to more escalation rather than deescalation of the situation.

[jtfanclub]

cherdano, on Nov 16 2007, 04:51 PM, said:

Add to that that many bridge players apparently have opinion that the suggested sanctions are adequate.

And some of us who think the suggested sanctions are too much think that some of said sanctions are merely proposed as a bargaining chip, so that the USBF can 'compromise' to something more reasonable.

I think getting a real apology and disallowing the team members from competing in the USBF Championships this May & June is appropriate. I see no reason to believe this won't be the end result, at least not yet.

I think a petition in FAVOR of the USBF would be more productive at this point. People tend to be more lenient when they aren't backed into a corner.

[han]

cherdano, on Nov 16 2007, 04:51 PM, said:

Aside from that it may just lead to more escalation rather than deescalation of the situation.

Agree, also voted "no and I live in the US".

[jdonn]

Arend what's the difference, even if they haven't acted yet you can petition them to do something, or not do something. It's not an accusation, quite the opposite it's very constructive.

[jonottawa]

Alright here's my first shot at this:

We, the undersigned members of the American Contract Bridge League, wish to bring to the attention of the USBF board of directors the following points, with which we are all in agreement:

1. The USA 1 Venice Cup team behaved in poor taste when they made a spur-of-the-moment decision to hold up a hand-made sign saying "We did not vote for Bush" at the awards banquet.

2. The behavior of the USBF Board of Directors since that event has been far worse than that exhibited by the USA 1 Venice Cup team at the awards banquet. The Board offered the members of the team a draconian punishment as a 'plea bargain' and threatened them with an even more draconian punishment if they declined the offer. This vengeful and mean-spirited behavior has brought substantial negative attention to our sport, has caused rifts to occur among our membership, has all but ensured that this controversy will drag on for some time (and end up in court) and has jeopardized the continued existence of the USBF.

3. The USBF Board of Directors should have, as its primary responsibility, taken steps to ensure that this sort of behavior does not reoccur instead of seeking to impose an exceedingly harsh punishment for a minor, first-time, transgression.

4. If the USBF Board of Directors does not change its approach to a more civilized and dignified one representing the mainstream opinion of United States bridge players, its members should resign.

5. Failing that, we will demand that the ACBL stop funding the USBF with our membership dues and with the funds collected at certain ACBL-sanctioned games.

[han]

What Jon wants to write doesn't sound very constructive to me Josh. Calling someone an idiot rarely works constructively.

[jdonn]

Hannie, on Nov 16 2007, 05:37 PM, said:

What Jon wants to write doesn't sound very constructive to me Josh. Calling someone an idiot rarely works constructively.

I agree, that is not what I had in mind at all. Terrible...

Not name calling, not telling them what they should have done, not threats or ultimatums (and not limited to ACBL members). Just politely but firmly asking them to do / not do something next.

[Walddk]

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 12:36 AM, said:

2. The behavior of the USBF Board of Directors since that event has been far worse than that exhibited by the USA 1 Venice Cup team at the awards banquet.  The Board offered the members of the team a draconian punishment as a 'plea bargain' and threatened them with an even more draconian punishment if they declined the offer.  This vengeful and mean-spirited behavior has brought substantial negative attention to our sport, has caused rifts to occur among our membership, has all but ensured that this controversy will drag on for some time (and end up in court) and has jeopardized the continued existence of the USBF.

Good thing you are not employed in the diplomacy. This is absolutely hopeless. Between the lines you are saying that the USBF BoD are incompetent, retarded individuals.

And your compromise under 1. doesn't convince anybody when they know that you don't mean what you are saying. Often enough did you write that the VCT did not do anything wrong in your opinion.

In your view the BoD's are idiots and the VCTM heroes.

Roland

[jonottawa]

I've said from the beginning that Miss Manners wouldn't approve of what they did, Roland. That's 'poor taste' in my books.

Anyway, it's easy to find fault with what I wrote, let's see what you guys can come up with. (At least those of you who are supportive of the idea of a petition.)

[helene_t]

I may or may not sign a petition, depending on the wording. Some comments on Jon's proposal:

1. It is not necessary to label the team's action as either "good taste", "bad taste", "inappropriate", "patriotic" or anything else. Obviously we differ with respect to our assessment of the action, but that is irrelevant to the petition.

2. While I think the core message should be something like that, the hostile wording does not make for a constructive move. If our goal is to get the BoD to step down or otherwise destroy the USBF by getting ACBL to stop funding them, then OK. OTOH if one possible goal is to get the BoD to change track, then a more friendly wording is called for. FWIW I don't think it's in anybody's interest to destroy the USBF, and getting the BoD to step down may not be that great an achievement either. I could be wrong, I don't know anything about how USBF works and what the prospects would be of transferring it's tasks to other organisations if USBF were to collapse.

3.-5. are fine with me.

Alternatively, a petition could be aimed at both parties and encourage them to stop lawyering and find a compromise. Fred's recent post in the other thread could serve as a start. That's a different strategy, one for which the time may have run out.

[Walddk]

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 12:57 AM, said:

I've said from the beginning that Miss Manners wouldn't approve of what they did, Roland.  That's 'poor taste' in my books.

Who cares what Miss Manners thinks? But I still recall what you wrote on October 14:

"I applaud them for their courage."

I assume you mean the VCTM and not the BoD's. If I am correct, you must just be the right person to seek a compromise. Can I do it better? Probably, but it has little relevance since I don't agree with your or jdonn's suggestion.

Roland

[fred]

Great idea. Let's try to humilate a group:

- of world class bridge players
- of unpaid volunteers who I am guessing would rather not be doing this and are only doing so as a service to our game
- of people who no doubt trying their best to solve an impossible problem
- of people who are no doubt receiving strong, continuous, and conflicting pressures from all directions
- of people who did not create this situation in the first place

Good luck getting people to sign your petition.

Good luck with your petition effecting change.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[luke warm]

no and i live in the usa (more or less)

[jonottawa]

fred, on Nov 16 2007, 11:27 PM, said:

Great idea. Let's try to humilate a group:

- of world class bridge players
- of unpaid volunteers who I am guessing would rather not be doing this and are only doing so as a service to our game
- of people who no doubt trying their best to solve an impossible problem
- of people who are no doubt receiving strong, continuous, and conflicting pressures from all directions
- of people who did not create this situation in the first place

Good luck getting people to sign your petition.

Good luck with your petition effecting change.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Fred, you're the one who used words like temporary insanity being contagious and outrageous to describe the Board's actions.

You, of all people, are in the best position to do something about this but all I see you doing is sitting around saying stuff like (paraphrasing):

"Well now, aren't those loony lefties and crazy righties just a bunch of goofballs?"

If you're working on this through back channels, that's one thing. I don't see anybody with any sense working on this at all. I'm frustrated. That's it.

[jocdelevat]

I voted no and I live in USA. I did that even I'm on VCT side however I do not think that any campaign pro VCT has any effect. The best campaign pro VCT is done by USBF BoD with their sanctions.

[bid_em_up]

cherdano, on Nov 16 2007, 04:51 PM, said:

I think a petition is ill-advised. We only heard indirectly about sanctions that the lawyer Allan Falk hired by the USBF BoD suggested. We do not know for sure that the forwarded e-mail is original. We do not know for sure whether the suggested punishment was Allan Falk's idea or really had the majority support of the USBF BoD. We do not know anything about the discussions that happened in private between the USBF BoD and the VCT.

I, also, was leery at first of whether or not the letter from Alan Falk was factual/original or not. I questioned the authenticity of such letters somewhere around page 32 of the VCT thread. Shortly thereafter, after logging into BBO under her user id and asking for my email address, a member of the VCT informed me that the post on page 30 of the VCT thread by Hrothgar @ 4:15 is an accurate excerpt from the letter that the VCT was sent by Alan Falk.

The initial one from the dutch blog had errors.

Why she chose to inform me of this, I do not know, but at least, now, I am certain (as I can possibly be) that the letter is factual. I'd rather not reveal which VCT member it was for privacy's sake.

[fred]

jonottawa, on Nov 16 2007, 11:40 PM, said:

fred, on Nov 16 2007, 11:27 PM, said:

Great idea. Let's try to humilate a group:

- of world class bridge players
- of unpaid volunteers who I am guessing would rather not be doing this and are only doing so as a service to our game
- of people who no doubt trying their best to solve an impossible problem
- of people who are no doubt receiving strong, continuous, and conflicting pressures from all directions
- of people who did not create this situation in the first place

Good luck getting people to sign your petition.

Good luck with your petition effecting change.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Fred, you're the one who used words like temporary insanity being contagious and outrageous to describe the Board's actions.

You, of all people, are in the best position to do something about this but all I see you doing is sitting around saying stuff like (paraphrasing):

"Well now, aren't those loony lefties and crazy righties just a bunch of goofballs?"

If you're working on this through back channels, that's one thing. I don't see anybody with any sense working on this at all. I'm frustrated. That's it.

Jon,

I admit that, at times, I have characterized some of the actions by some of the people in a sarcastic (and even rude) manner.

However, there are some big differences between me and you:

1) When I make such statements they are almost always accompanied by a statement of how much I like and respect the person in question and how surprised I am that he (actually they have mostly been she's) would be capable of such behavior.

2) I am not one to get involved in petitions or working behind the scenes. When I say something rude in public it is my own opinion and the consequences of my rudeness are between me and the person I was rude to. I do not start campaigns or lobby others to pass on my sarcastic and insulting comments to the people they refer to.

3) Despite my strong feelings about the wrongness of what the Venice Cup Team did I am able to put this aside, not call for anyone's blood, and offer some constructive suggestions on how disaster might be avoided. Your petition was not what I would call "constructive". The way you conveniently shift (almost) all the blame to the other side, (almost) completely ignore any wrongdoing by the group who created this mess, and launch your own call for blood reminds me of the tactics of those you claim to despise so much (Sean Hannity comes to mind).

4) I have no strong political views that at least have the potential to bias everything that I write. I am not a member of either the loony left or the crazy right.

Sorry in advance, but I am not going to let myself be dragged into another argument here (at least not today).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[jonottawa]

fred, on Nov 17 2007, 12:34 AM, said:

Jon,

I admit that, at times, I have characterized some of the actions by some of the people in a sarcastic (and even rude) manner.

However, there are some big differences between me and you:

1) When I make such statements they are almost always accompanied by a statement of how much I like and respect the person in question and how surprised I am that he (actually they have mostly been she's) would be capable of such behavior.

2) I am not one to get involved in petitions or working behind the scenes. When I say something rude in public it is my own opinion and the consequences of my rudeness are between me and the person I was rude to. I do not start campaigns or lobby others to pass on my sarcastic and insulting comments to the people they refer to.

3) Despite my strong feelings about the wrongness of what the Venice Cup Team did I am able to put this aside, not call for anyone's blood, and offer some constructive suggestions on how disaster might be avoided. Your petition was not what I would call "constructive". The way you conveniently shift (almost) all the blame to the other side, (almost) completely ignore any wrongdoing by the group who created this mess, and launch your own call for blood reminds me of the tactics of those you claim to despise so much (Sean Hannity comes to mind).

4) I have no strong political views that at least have the potential to bias everything that I write. I am not a member of either the loony left or the crazy right.

Sorry in advance, but I am not going to let myself be dragged into another argument here (at least not today).

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Fred,

"1) When I make such statements they are almost always accompanied by a statement of how much I like and respect the person in question and how surprised I am that he (actually they have mostly been she's) would be capable of such behavior."

I don't share your view that someone must like me, respect me or praise me in order to criticize me. Nor must I like them, respect them or praise them in order to criticize them. Your view is certainly more diplomatic and will win you more friends in life. Mine is more honest and straightforward. To each his own.

"2) I am not one to get involved in petitions or working behind the scenes. When I say something rude in public it is my own opinion and the consequences of my rudeness are between me and the person I was rude to. I do not start campaigns or lobby others to pass on my sarcastic and insulting comments to the people they refer to."

Your 2nd point seems to imply that I am somehow trying to lurk in the shadows while my gullible puppets do my evil bidding. C'mon now. Get serious. First, I'm here with my real picture, with a link to my website, www.jonathanferguson.com I'm as transparent as can be. When I first floated the idea of a petition, there were no takers. I let it drop. Today Josh resurrected the idea. So I started this thread. I asked others to propose the wording of the petition. Thus far I've had no takers. So I proposed wording of my own. Critical of both sides in this matter. Not sarcastic, no. Insulting? Well, yes, criticism is often perceived as insulting.

"3) Despite my strong feelings about the wrongness of what the Venice Cup Team did I am able to put this aside, not call for anyone's blood, and offer some constructive suggestions on how disaster might be avoided. Your petition was not what I would call "constructive". The way you conveniently shift (almost) all the blame to the other side, (almost) completely ignore any wrongdoing by the group who created this mess, and launch your own call for blood reminds me of the tactics of those you claim to despise so much (Sean Hannity comes to mind)."

It's the Board that "wants blood." I believe in the golden rule. If they want to treat the Venice Cup team like that, they should get some of their own medicine and decide if they like how it tastes. I also believe in fair warning. If they come down hard on the team in SF, I think getting fired from the board will be the least of their concerns.

"4) I have no strong political views that at least have the potential to bias everything that I write. I am not a member of either the loony left or the crazy right."

I strongly believe in the US Constitution. I believe it's the greatest political document ever written. While you were busy competing for Junior championships, I was busy watching Sunday talk shows, dreaming of the day I could move to the US. That should not make me a radical. Unfortunately, in the last 7 years, the US government has been overthrown by a group of radicals intent on destroying the principles outlined in that document. To speak out against them is decried as radical behavior by some. I do not believe that is a rational or justifiable view, nor do the vast majority of non-Americans I speak to.

"Sorry in advance, but I am not going to let myself be dragged into another argument here (at least not today)."

Fine by me.