Re: Board 32, from Grattan Endicott

"David Stevenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Bruce Scott wrote
>
> >I'm sure that some feel that a deposit should be returned unless the
appeal
> >is ridiculous. That would be my inclination. This appeal doesn't appear
to
> >have
> >been ridiculous.
> >
> >I'm uncomfortable with the idea of deposits in the first place. I'm not
> >nominating
> >an alternative, just registering a gripe. :)
>
>    Not much help.
>
>    The problem is that there are too many frivolous appeals, and no known
> method works in all cases.  Thus it is easy to criticise the system
> without suggesting better alternatives.
>
> >There was a Bridge World bit about a deposit being kept in an instance
> >where the committee wasn't even unanimous in its ruling. Keeping the
> >deposit in such a circumstance truly IS ridiculous.
>
>    Not necessarily.  It depends as always on the actual facts.
>
> -- 
> David Stevenson               Bridge   RTFLB   Cats  Railways    /\ /\
> Liverpool, England, UK        Fax: +44 870 055 7697               @ @
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>         ICQ 20039682     bluejak on OKB   =( + )=
>             Bridgepage:        http://blakjak.com/brg_menu.htm      ~

What hogwash!! How can an appeal be frivilous if the committee is split. No
wonder you guys lost an empire!!

John Blubaugh