[cherdano]

inquiry, on May 3 2007, 08:56 AM, said:

So I am going to enforce a long standing Bridge Base Forum rule about publishing information from other sites. From now on, new threads referecing bridge clues and the bidding there will be deleted and users posting them have their warning levels elevated and potentially their posting rights removed.

This sounds a little vague and overly general. I would hope we can still post hands that we found elsewhere - say I don't understand one of Pavlicek's analysis', then I'd rather ask here than bother him about it.

Can't we just say we stick to copyright? Posting a single hand is then always ok, posting a collection of selected hands probably not. Copy-pasting the entire comment about one hand would not be ok.
Etc.

(I agree dissecting many hands from one particular bridge column should be off-topic, it's just not interesting.)

Arend

[inquiry]

If someone comes here and day after days says that some bridge website is great, and we should all go visit it, I will censor those. Want to tell us once in while to take a look at favorite site of yours, fine, np.

If someone comes here and says day after day that some bridge website sucks, and we should never go there, eventually we would censor that.

IF you want to take a thread/hand/concept from somewhere else and get input on it here, fine, np. But to present that site each day in a negative light, or to make it look like a fancy way to advertise that site everyday for little reason than to drive participation in that site, and we step in.

The wording is intentionally vague. First, no is going to try to track down where the essence of your post came from. Second, the occassional post is not a problem. The quote above was in reponse to what could best be described as "how could anyone teach this bid?" and all referred to one specific site. After a while the "that is too much" line will be crossed and we will stop it. Seems sensible to me to leave it vague and try to let you guys who for the most part have excellent judgement figure out how to avoid crossing the line.

[glen]

This is clearly a sad attempt to stop our new site:

www.Britney-Nicole-Lindsay-Paris-Play-Bridge!!!.com

Just after we had convinced all four to quit clubbing (aside from ♣ bids) and play rubber bridge, and now BBO puts a stop to this upcoming expose bridge site.

[chicken]

ok, you got me, i couldnt resist and clicked the link.

[keylime]

Hott......so hott.....it hit me one more time so I couldn't help myself.....

[glen]

Okay, here's the sadder update. Some of you might not have seen the site, since after the Britney strip squezze deal we were getting too many hits. Then Paris took a break, went to court, and never came back! It turns out the judge is not a bridge aficionado. So our 1st attempt at celebrity bridge is offline. I'm now looking for a bridge player with last name Demi, to launch our next attempt, www.demi-and-ashton-play-bridge.com

[pbleighton]

Quote

Okay, here's the sadder update. Some of you might not have seen the site, since after the Britney strip squezze deal we were getting too many hits. Then Paris took a break, went to court, and never came back! It turns out the judge is not a bridge aficionado. So our 1st attempt at celebrity bridge is offline. I'm now looking for a bridge player with last name Demi, to launch our next attempt, www.demi-and-ashton-play-bridge.com

Will the conditions of contest allow suction over a big club?

Peter