[kenrexford]

Here's my idea:

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 decision to hold up a hand-made sign saying "We did not vote for Bush" at the awards banquet and did not state that they each "approved of this message."

2. The behavior of the USBF Board of Directors since that event has been an inappropriate response. The Board offered the members of the team an opportunity to apologize, but that was outrageous conduct. It was the typical boys club picking on women.

3. The USBF Board of Directors should have, as its primary responsibility, taken steps to ensure that Hillary Clinton is the Next President of the United States, Hoo-Rah!!!!

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

5. Failing that, we will take our ball home and not play with you any more.

[pclayton]

Not a lot of voting in the past three hours, but it still appears that of the USA members that have checked in that the idea of a petition is not supported by a ratio of 3:1.

In an election a 75 / 25 split is considered a landslide.

To be fair, I'm sure some of the 'no' votes arent supporting the USBF, rather they are just against a petition for some other reason.

Nevertheless if I supported the petition (I dont) I would be concerned the vote sends a message of support to Jan and co.

[nickf]

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 07:40 AM, said:

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

Naff idea.

I'd like to propose another petition, but I should really restrain myself.

nickf
sydney

[jonottawa]

pclayton, on Nov 17 2007, 07:29 AM, said:

Not a lot of voting in the past three hours, but it still appears that of the USA members that have checked in that the idea of a petition is not supported by a ratio of 3:1.

In an election a 75 / 25 split is considered a landslide.

To be fair, I'm sure some of the 'no' votes arent supporting the USBF, rather they are just against a petition for some other reason.

Nevertheless if I supported the petition (I dont) I would be concerned the vote sends a message of support to Jan and co.

There's already a (pretty evenly-divided) poll up about which side is to blame so I don't see how this poll sends a message of support to anyone.

If you think Fred wading into a thread and kiboshing an idea isn't going to skew poll results here, you must think the Florida election results in 2000 and Ohio election results in 2004 were legitimate.

[Walddk]

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 01:46 PM, said:

If you think Fred wading into a thread and kiboshing an idea ...

How disrespectful, to Fred as well as the rest of us. I expected no less when it came from you. We are quite capable of expressing our own views without getting "help" from Fred.

Roland

[jonottawa]

Walddk, on Nov 17 2007, 12:02 PM, said:

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 01:46 PM, said:

If you think Fred wading into a thread and kiboshing an idea ...

How disrespectful, to Fred as well as the rest of us. I expected no less when it came from you. We are quite capable of expressing our own views without getting "help" from Fred.

Roland

I'm sure that Fred felt very disrespected when I suggested that his opinion carries a lot of weight around here.

Preach on Mr. "You don’t intimidate me, I only take orders from Fred Gitelman."

[Walddk]

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 02:15 PM, said:

Walddk, on Nov 17 2007, 12:02 PM, said:

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 01:46 PM, said:

If you think Fred wading into a thread and kiboshing an idea ...

How disrespectful, to Fred as well as the rest of us. I expected no less when it came from you. We are quite capable of expressing our own views without getting "help" from Fred.

Roland

I'm sure that Fred felt very disrespected when I suggested that his opinion carries a lot of weight around here.

Preach on Mr. "You don’t intimidate me, I only take orders from Fred Gitelman."

Typical. You ignored the first part of your post and think you made up for it by adding the second part.

As to your last comment. Indeed, as far as vugraph is concerned I only take orders from Fred Gitelman. Is that so strange? By the way, I don't have to take any because Fred never ordered me to do anything.

"It's your call", is how Fred handles it in every situation, so he seems to be happy with the decisions I make. I have a lot of respect for Fred, and I have little respect for people who think other people are idiots if they don't have the same views as them.

Roland

[jonottawa]

Walddk, on Nov 17 2007, 12:25 PM, said:

I have a lot of respect for Fred, and I have little respect for people who think other people are idots if they don't have the same views as them.

Roland

No Roland, I think people are "idots" who run around being as disrespectful as possible and then accuse other people of similar behavior. Especially if they have smurfy little signature lines.

[luke warm]

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 07:30 AM, said:

Walddk, on Nov 17 2007, 12:25 PM, said:

I have a lot of respect for Fred, and I have little respect for people who think other people are idots if they don't have the same views as them.

Roland

No Roland, I think people are "idots" who run around being as disrespectful as possible and then accuse other people of similar behavior. Especially if they have smurfy little signature lines.

you mean like people who call policemen 'pigs' and certain BoD members 'idiots'?

"you are a pig because you wrote me a ticket for breaking a law" ... "you are an idiot because i don't like the rule you want to enforce" ... "i can't be swayed from my views because i have free speech on my side - the rest of you sheep can be bought for a post from fred"

[bid_em_up]

This is quite typical of Jon, it seems.

He wants free speech, but only for himself.

He wants people to be able to express their views freely, but only if it agrees with what he thinks.

He wants to insult people, but then takes offense when he is insulted in return.

He evidently idolizes Political Pundits, and thinks he is one himself.

Attack, attack, attack, insult, insult, insult, then when really challenged on their positions, they either 1) insist you are trying to put words in their mouth, or 2) they change the subject, or 3) call you names.

Jon evidently is a big fan of these tactics, but they rarely actually accomplish anything. Pundits are incapable of actually discussing anything rationally with those who disagree with them. They are only capable of spewing vile rhetoric.

Maybe one day, Jon will realize this isn't his blog he is writing on, nor is it MSNBC or Fox News and he will choose to actually discuss things instead of attempting to be the Stephen Colbert of BBO.

You watch way too much TV, Jon. You said so yourself,

Quote

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

Try reading a book instead, might I suggest something by Dale Carnegie other than "How To Lose Friends and Piss Off Your Enemies", which seems to be the only one you have ever read.

[pclayton]

From 1997 to 2000 , I was appointed as a Planning Commissioner in the City of West Covina, CA. In addition, I've attended well over 100 City Council and Board of Supervisors meetings during my career in real estate.

During the first portion of most meetings, the public is invited to speak on matters not on the agenda. Every community has one or two of these types of individuals which also known as gadflies who always speak at this time.

They are generally old men or women with disgustingly bad health and hygiene, and are frequently paranoid schizophrenics. They are egotistical as well, and are of the opinion that they know more about a subject than the agency staff members, much less the elected officials who are listening to the drivel.

Because of their approach, they are largely ignored.

When I chaired the PC, there was one particular individual that always came and spoke about environmental issues. He was an engineer by trade and a widower but he had some mental problems and no one took him really seriously. He made some very good points, but they were lost among his non-objective approach.

He had ZERO impact on public policy, and never understood how change really happens, such as consensus building and effective lobbying.

[jdonn]

pclayton, on Nov 17 2007, 02:29 AM, said:

Not a lot of voting in the past three hours, but it still appears that of the USA members that have checked in that the idea of a petition is not supported by a ratio of 3:1.

In an election a 75 / 25 split is considered a landslide.

But this is not an election. Can you imagine the impact if even 1% of acbl members signed a petition that went to the USBF, much less 25%?

[pclayton]

Jon, sometimes I wonder if you can think clearly for more than a period of 30 seconds. Not a good attribute for a bridge player, mind you.

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 03:46 AM, said:

If you think Fred wading into a thread and kiboshing an idea isn't going to skew poll results here, you must think the Florida election results in 2000 and Ohio election results in 2004 were legitimate.

Apparently the reason this poll is losing is because Fred and the CIA are sending radio signals to our brains influencing our opinions.

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 03:46 AM, said:

There's already a (pretty evenly-divided) poll up about which side is to blame so I don't see how this poll sends a message of support to anyone.

Hallelujah, at last an impartial poll where Fred isn't influencing the outcome! Clear example of democracy in action.

[pclayton]

jdonn, on Nov 17 2007, 08:28 AM, said:

pclayton, on Nov 17 2007, 02:29 AM, said:

Not a lot of voting in the past three hours, but it still appears that of the USA members that have checked in that the idea of a petition is not supported by a ratio of 3:1.

In an election a 75 / 25 split is considered a landslide.

But this is not an election. Can you imagine the impact if even 1% of acbl members signed a petition that went to the USBF, much less 25%?

On the contrary. A poll (which mirrors an election) shows who supports and who doesn't support.

A petition just shows who supports.

[uday]

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=22345

[jonottawa]

uday, on Nov 17 2007, 05:06 PM, said:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=22345

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?

[fred]

jonottawa, on Nov 17 2007, 07:45 PM, said:

uday, on Nov 17 2007, 05:06 PM, said:

http://forums.bridge...showtopic=22345

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?

Suppose a petition based on Hrothgar's letter were to be made available.

My guess is that, of the population of people who read that petition and were in principle willing to sign *some* petition to the USBF on this matter, somewhere around 40% of these would be willing to sign the Hrothgar-letter-based petition.

So you might be able to get a reasonable number of signatures.

Would it make any difference? My guess is possibly, but very very unlikely.

I thought Hrothgar's letter was quite good in several respects, but I would not personally sign a petition that was based on his letter without some very serious editing. I doubt Hrothgar himself would be willing to sign the petition after I was done with my edits.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

[jdonn]

I think the letter is a good starting point for a petition (as a letter from one person it was very good). Pretty much I would just shorten it, in particular removing most of the parts about how I (well he) feel(s) and trying to stick to what we are asking to occur and why. I would also remove most/all mention of the media and blogs. Let me try this, which is merely his letter with many parts removed and some other slight changes.


We, the undersigned, are writing this petition to respectably request that the USBF ceases its attempts to punish members of the 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 taken toward the Venice Cup Team.

Respectfully,

the undersigned


Something like that?

[jonottawa]

jdonn, on Nov 17 2007, 10:58 PM, said:

I think the letter is a good starting point for a petition (as a letter from one person it was very good). Pretty much I would just shorten it, in particular removing most of the parts about how I (well he) feel(s) and trying to stick to what we are asking to occur and why. I would also remove most/all mention of the media and blogs. Let me try this, which is merely his letter with many parts removed and some other slight changes.


We, the undersigned, are writing this petition to respectably request that the USBF ceases its attempts to punish members of the 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 taken toward the Venice Cup Team.

Respectfully,

the undersigned


Something like that?

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.

[jdonn]

Maybe just a little button to the side someone could click that says if they are an ACBL member. I don't think it has to be very scientific, it is just a way to express opinions and try to influence a change.

On second thought, first column: Name. Second column: ACBL number (if applicable) Third column: Comments. Probably including ACBL member numbers is best, partly for the sake of being open, partly so non-members can't lie and screw things up.