[diana_eva]

1eyedjack, on 2014-April-28, 11:49, said:

Are you aware of any two sponsoring organizations for which the responses would differ on this point?

I think the point was whether it was a free tourney or one of the pay tourneys with certified TDs and more clear rules.

[1eyedjack]

gordontd, on 2014-April-28, 00:20, said:

wayne_b, on 2014-April-27, 23:34, said:

It is never correct to ask bidder for an explanation; questions should directed to bidder's partner. What is of import is what the partner took the bid to mean, anything else does not matter.

This is wrong. In the online game, it is the bidder who self-alerts,

I am always happy to be corrected, but I believe that in an offline face to face game played with screens there is a certain amount of self-alerting/explaining going on also. Never played in those lofty circles myself so could be talking a load of cr*p.

[Bbradley62]

1eyedjack, on 2014-April-28, 11:49, said:

hrothgar, on 2014-April-26, 16:04, said:

What organization was sponsoring the tournament?

Are you aware of any two sponsoring organizations for which the responses would differ on this point?

Although the answers to the original questions should be the same regardless of sponsoring organization, ACBL (and possibly other "real world" sponsors) are expected to have competent directors to settle such issues, and there might be something that can be done about the lack thereof. In a volunteer "let's run a tournament" (like Judy and Mickey putting on a show), follow-up advice might be to simply not participate in tournaments that you know to be run by incompetents.

[Bbradley62]

wayne_b, on 2014-April-27, 23:34, said:

It is never correct to ask bidder for an explanation; questions should directed to bidder's partner. What is of import is what the partner took the bid to mean, anything else does not matter.

It is never correct to post stupidity in extra-large letters.

[barmar]

Bbradley62, on 2014-April-28, 14:24, said:

It is never correct to post stupidity in extra-large letters.

Someone else already corrected him and commented on the font. Rubbing it in is not necessary (although I won't go so far as to say it's "never correct").

[wayne_b]

barmar, on 2014-April-28, 20:42, said:

Someone else already corrected him and commented on the font. Rubbing it in is not necessary (although I won't go so far as to say it's "never correct").

Weak eyesight makes this correct in all instances.

[gordontd]

wayne_b, on 2014-April-28, 22:35, said:

Weak eyesight makes this correct in all instances.

In that case I apologise for my earlier comment. However, I wonder if you know that using Ctrl+ will enlarge the text on the whole page for you - not just the bits you wrote - without affecting what anyone else sees?

[gordontd]

1eyedjack, on 2014-April-28, 12:03, said:

I am always happy to be corrected, but I believe that in an offline face to face game played with screens there is a certain amount of self-alerting/explaining going on also. Never played in those lofty circles myself so could be talking a load of cr*p.

Yes, you are quite correct - with screens you alert and explain your own calls as well as your partner's to your screenmate.

[barmar]

wayne_b, on 2014-April-28, 22:34, said:

Weak eyesight makes this correct in all instances.

The replies will still be in the normal font. Posting your own message in a big font doesn't help you read the rest. And you presumably already know what you wrote, so you don't need to see it clearly.

If everyone ELSE had poor eyesight, your approach would be appreciated.

[Vampyr]

barmar, on 2014-April-29, 08:40, said:

If everyone ELSE had poor eyesight, your approach would be appreciated.

Wouldn't they already be viewing larger text, though?