[cherdano]

Hannie, on Sep 26 2005, 06:33 PM, said:

Let me quickly make a few apologies before I get banned:

Arend, sorry for using your nationality to make fun of you.

Too late, I reported you to abuse already. Since yellows like Ben, riton know how badly you behave, I am sure they will take appropriate measures soon.

[mycroft]

I'm very glad that this is handled on a case-by-case basis. As an (occasional) ACBL LTD, I have to walk the ZT official policy line, and I get it wrong. I know I do, and I just hope that I'm guessing wrong on the "best for most" side. I'm glad this isn't necessary here.

2 obvious cases, there are many that are less obvious:

1) Evening of a two-session regional Flight A pairs game. Pair in question is obviously just playing out the string, they're happily drunk, and playing against their friends. Conversation gets a bit out of hand, ending with a "FU,P" that can be heard at least one table away, and definately heard by Mr. TD. Everybody - and I mean everybody - at the table laughs, the speaker notices I'm a table away and smiling, and mentions "I'm glad the TD didn't hear that." ZT or no ZT, in this case there was no infraction - in fact my response was "as long as everybody else is fine with it, so am I".

2) I play bar bridge after the game - not as much out here, but a lot in Waterloo. Bar bridge, especially with a pitcher of Dark on the table and drink penalties for whatever anyone thinks is bad bridge (self-inflicted, of course, more often than not), can get a bit colourful. No worries, we're all friends, we all know nobody means anything.

Well, I play online with these people sometimes, too, and sometimes we play bar rules; everyone has a glass by the computer. If the same comments come out there, with no kibs that aren't in the loop, WTP? Well, unless abuse@BBO has to react due to their regulations...

Handling online abuse, be it BBO, net, forums, email, is a thankless and truly soul-draining job. From what I can tell, you guys do it well.

Michael.

[jillybean]

mycroft, on Sep 26 2005, 11:48 AM, said:

1) Evening of a two-session regional Flight A pairs game. Pair in question is obviously just playing out the string, they're happily drunk, and playing against their friends. Conversation gets a bit out of hand, ending with a "FU,P" that can be heard at least one table away, and definately heard by Mr. TD. Everybody - and I mean everybody - at the table laughs, the speaker notices I'm a table away and smiling, and mentions "I'm glad the TD didn't hear that." ZT or no ZT, in this case there was no infraction - in fact my response was "as long as everybody else is fine with it, so am I".

Doesn't "everybody else" include the people at the next table or anyone else in within hearing distance?

jb

[Echognome]

Hannie, on Sep 26 2005, 05:33 PM, said:

Let me quickly make a few apologies before I get banned:

Matt, I still think that you are a donkey. 

If you even think of calling me donkey, then your new nickname will be Shrek.

[Al_U_Card]

Echognome, on Sep 26 2005, 02:03 PM, said:

Hannie, on Sep 26 2005, 05:33 PM, said:

Let me quickly make a few apologies before I get banned:

Matt, I still think that you are a donkey. 

If you even think of calling me donkey, then your new nickname will be Shrek.

The only "real" way to handle abuse, be smarter (and funnier too!) than the abuser.

[han]

I will add Shrek to my BBO profile.

[pigpenz]

if we could ban someone every time there was someting that we didnt like there might not be anyone here left to play bridge with.

I have always liked the approach hockey takes, where grown men hit each other with sticks, pucks, and fists and at the end of the series they all shake hands and go on their merry way...bridge should be so lucky

[mycroft]

jillybean2, on Sep 26 2005, 01:02 PM, said:

mycroft, on Sep 26 2005, 11:48 AM, said:

1) Evening of a two-session regional Flight A pairs game.  Pair in question is obviously just playing out the string, they're happily drunk, and playing against their friends.  Conversation gets a bit out of hand, ending with a "FU,P" that can be heard at least one table away, and definately heard by Mr. TD.  Everybody - and I mean everybody - at the table laughs, the speaker notices I'm a table away and smiling, and mentions "I'm glad the TD didn't hear that."  ZT or no ZT, in this case there was no infraction - in fact my response was "as long as everybody else is fine with it, so am I".

Doesn't "everybody else" include the people at the next table or anyone else in within hearing distance?

jb

That is correct, and if any of them had anything to say about it, I would have had to deal with it formally. But nobody outside the table did have anything to say.

Michael.

[McBruce]

I have found that bridge players are usually quite good at distinguishing between behaviour that is colourful and behaviour that is unquestionably unacceptable. Seldom do players press a ZT complaint that is questionable.

Many Units including ours had our fits with the ZT policy to get it implemented. Most of the detractors felt that they would be at risk of paying penalties to players not because of something they said, but because personalities and old grudges would be involved.

I can report that we have had zero ZT penalties or expulsions since we adopted a modified ZT. The main modification was that we added the option of escaping with a sincere apology for minor offenses: the original ZT forces the TD to penalize (not that all of them do) when there is bad behavior. The chaos predicted by the detractors simply has not materialized at all, let alone in the avalanche of TD calls predicted when we fought to get ZT into our policies.

[mike777]

McBruce, on Sep 29 2005, 06:03 PM, said:

I have found that bridge players are usually quite good at distinguishing between behaviour that is colourful and behaviour that is unquestionably unacceptable. Seldom do players press a ZT complaint that is questionable.

Many Units including ours had our fits with the ZT policy to get it implemented. Most of the detractors felt that they would be at risk of paying penalties to players not because of something they said, but because personalities and old grudges would be involved.

I can report that we have had zero ZT penalties or expulsions since we adopted a modified ZT. The main modification was that we added the option of escaping with a sincere apology for minor offenses: the original ZT forces the TD to penalize (not that all of them do) when there is bad behavior. The chaos predicted by the detractors simply has not materialized at all, let alone in the avalanche of TD calls predicted when we fought to get ZT into our policies.

1) Ok seems you have done a great job measuring if it would be a disaster, it has not been.
2) How do you measure if it has been a success? How do you define success and how do you measure it?
3) Is it possible nothing has improved?

[candybar]

uday, on Sep 26 2005, 12:20 AM, said:

.....I invented exactly one of the items from the list. The remainder are taken from "real life".

I bet it was the tea party