[TomReynold]

As I posted on Bridge Winners, if one has been the target of a false allegation in a serious matter, then the WBF's statement and condemnation of the communities activities makes perfect sense.

Nevertheless, even though I have been the target (non Bridge related) I ask the question: "What was the community supposed to Do?" I fully understand that the evidenced has not been vetted, that withdrawing from the event should not create a presumption of guilt and having credentials revoked doesn't either.

However, in the absence of a reasonable process to catch cheats, the community took measures in their own hands. I applaud them for it.

But make no mistake about it. We have not yet caught a single cheat.

Tom

[Hanoi5]

 TomReynold, on 2015-October-09, 18:34, said:

As I posted on Bridge Winners, if one has been the target of a false allegation in a serious matter, then the WBF's statement and condemnation of the communities activities makes perfect sense.

Nevertheless, even though I have been the target (non Bridge related) I ask the question: "What was the community supposed to Do?" I fully understand that the evidenced has not been vetted, that withdrawing from the event should not create a presumption of guilt and having credentials revoked doesn't either.

However, in the absence of a reasonable process to catch cheats, the community took measures in their own hands. I applaud them for it.

But make no mistake about it. We have not yet caught a single cheat.

Tom

You probably mean THEY have not caught a single cheat. Even though this process has been violent almost all bridge players interested can draw their own conclusions on whether F-S, F-N and P-S cheated or not. B-Z is another matter, as there hasn't been a clear hypotheses correctly tested to the satisfaction of most. But it is certainly true: They haven't caught a cheater yet.

[jallerton]

 TomReynold, on 2015-October-09, 18:34, said:

But make no mistake about it. We have not yet caught a single cheat.

Tom

 Hanoi5, on 2015-October-09, 19:22, said:

You probably mean THEY have not caught a single cheat. Even though this process has been violent almost all bridge players interested can draw their own conclusions on whether F-S, F-N and P-S cheated or not. B-Z is another matter, as there hasn't been a clear hypotheses correctly tested to the satisfaction of most. But it is certainly true: They haven't caught a cheater yet.

Really? Wasn't a pair "caught" in the 2013 d'Orsi Bowl (Seniors)? I'm sure I remember reading about that somewhere......

[Zelandakh]

One pair has admitted their guilt so I would suggest that qualifies as a pair having been caught.

[Fluffy]

Does anyone know how people get elected for WBF positions?

Lack of resigns on WBF is making it look pretty similar to politicians in my country. They will hold power for as long as they can and that is their only concern. People are just those fools to deceive into voting them.

Even worse, today's politis in my country whoever resigns is actually someone with enough honesty to be unable to stand things being done as badly as they are. So they should be the last ones to leave.

[Vampyr]

 Fluffy, on 2015-October-10, 06:45, said:

Does anyone know how people get elected for WBF positions?

Lack of resigns on WBF is making it look pretty similar to politicians in my country. They will hold power for as long as they can and that is their only concern. People are just those fools to deceive into voting them.

Even worse, today's politis in my country whoever resigns is actually someone with enough honesty to be unable to stand things being done as badly as they are. So they should be the last ones to leave.

One would think that the only sensible way forward for the WBF would be for pretty much everyone to resign. But their recent statement suggests that they are considering nothing of the sort.

[captyogi]

 Fluffy, on 2015-October-10, 06:45, said:

Does anyone know how people get elected for WBF positions?

Lack of resigns on WBF is making it look pretty similar to politicians in my country. They will hold power for as long as they can and that is their only concern. People are just those fools to deceive into voting them.

Even worse, today's politis in my country whoever resigns is actually someone with enough honesty to be unable to stand things being done as badly as they are. So they should be the last ones to leave.

this is what i have copy pasted from BW

Donald Mamula commented on the Bridge Winners content Statement by WBF ( Oct 9, 2015):
________________________________________
The President, Vice-Presidents, Secretary and Treasurer must all be members of the WBF Executive. Interestingly, there is contradictory language (bolded by me) in the bylaws, but I guess that doesn't matter to their process.

From the WBF Bylaws:

7.1 Officers.

The officers of the WBF shall include a President, one or more Vice-Presidents, a Secretary, a Treasurer and a General Counsel. The Officers, other than the General Counsel and the President, shall be elected by the Executive at its regular meetings every four (4) years held in conjunction with each Bridge Championship commencing in 1978. Commencing with 2009, and every four years thereafter, the President shall be elected, but the term of office shall not begin until the end of the Championships the year following such election. The terms of the officers shall be for a period of four years and until their successors are elected and qualified; provided however, that < strong>if an election for President results in no successor being elected because no candidate has received at least 75% of the votes of the whole Executive, then the incumbent President’s term of office shall end without his successor being elected and qualified.

Any two or more offices may be held by the same person, except the offices of President and Secretary. Each candidate for office shall be nominated and seconded by members of the Executive. Election of Officers shall be by secret ballot only if there is more than one candidate for the office. Newly elected officers shall assume office on the last day of the Championships at which they were elected except that if an office becomes vacant during the term of the officer, the newly elected officer shall assume office as soon as practicable after the predecessor officer has vacated the office. Election of any officer shall require the affirmative vote of a majority of the members of the Executive present at any meeting at which a quorum is present; and if there are more than two candidates for any office and none receives a majority vote on the first ballot, then those two candidates receiving the largest plurality of votes shall continue to stand as candidates with any others receiving a lesser number of votes being eliminated as candidates. Upon an officer (other than the General Counsel) ceasing to be a member of the Executive, such person shall no longer continue as an officer and the office shall be vacant until filled by the Executive.

[1eyedjack]

That analysis could be more informative, if it explained how the Executive is appointed.

[Fluffy]

So Executives name officers, only officers might become executives. Basically they name themselves as a typical oligarchy?

[Zelandakh]

Executive Council.

[1eyedjack]

 Zelandakh, on 2015-October-10, 15:08, said:

Executive Council.

Well, you can guess the next question; and the next; and the next.

To cut through several future posts, the point of interest is the trail from an individual player to the appointment of a WBF officer.

What we know so far:

WBF officers are "elected" by an "Executive Council"
The Executive council is comprised of "delegates" appointed from 8 geographical regions.
Presumably a particular geographical region has a body of officers responsible for appointing delegates to the executive council.
The obvious question that then arises is how that body of officers is themselves appointed to that position authority to appoint a delegate.
I suspect that those officers are themselves appointed by NBOs, who are themselves comprised of officers responsible for, inter alia, that process.
And then the NBOs are comprised of officers who are typically appointed by election in AGMs which I suspect are poorly attended by individual players.

God knows, I may have missed out a step or two. But the point is that the pretence of any lip-service to the concept of democracy is rather illusory in terms of any actual player having influence over the matter.

[blackshoe]

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.

I didn't coin that, somebody else did.

[captyogi]

WBF Constitution: http://www.worldbrid...onstitution.pdf

WBF Bylaws: http://www.worldbrid.../WBFBy-Laws.pdf

[steve2005]

The problem is the WBF and other NBO have rules and procedures to follow. They can't just punish a pair because someone posted something on the internet no matter how damning it is. So don't blame wbf etc for following their own rules.

Now I suspect someone (B) got fed up with players not being prosecuted and took matters in their own hands and posted on internet and to NBO's

[aguahombre]

 blackshoe, on 2015-October-10, 17:21, said:

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.

I didn't coin that, somebody else did.

I think it was Hannibal Lector.

[barmar]

 aguahombre, on 2015-October-11, 13:31, said:

I think it was Hannibal Lector.

Wikiquote says that it's widely attributed to Benjamin Franklin, but isn't found in any of his writings. Also, the quote usually says "lunch", but that word didn't become common until after Franklin's death.

It sounds more like something Frank Underwood would have said on "House of Cards", but Wikiquote has found uses of the quote going back to 1990.

BTW, their version of it continues with "Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."

[phil_20686]

Quote

However, the WBF does not approve of the current lynch mob mentality and approach that is being utilised by a small number of people. Regardless of any potential culpability, it is a requirement in any civilised society that those accused of any wrong doing are given details of what is alleged, the evidence that is said to support such allegations, and the opportunity to answer those matters. The WBF is aware that some players have been threatened with public exposure if they do not immediately agree with the direction of those who accuse them. It should be stressed that the people offering such “deals” have no legitimacy — they are without any legal standing in respect of the organisation of the sport of bridge.

This seems pretty tone-deaf to me.

Anyone who looks at this as if its the method of bringing cheaters to justice which is the primary problem seems pretty deluded. Surely the main problem is that people have been cheating for decades with complete impunity. The WBF seems not to be taking any responsibility at all for its failures.

[gnasher]

 phil_20686, on 2015-October-12, 03:39, said:

This seems pretty tone-deaf to me.

Anyone who looks at this as if its the method of bringing cheaters to justice which is the primary problem seems pretty deluded. Surely the main problem is that people have been cheating for decades with complete impunity. The WBF seems not to be taking any responsibility at all for its failures.

I think the WBF's concern is that it might be a method of bringing honest players to injustice. If that occurred, it would be at least as big a problem as cheating.

[billw55]

 gnasher, on 2015-October-12, 05:24, said:

I think the WBF's concern is that it might be a method of bringing honest players to injustice. If that occurred, it would be at least as big a problem as cheating.

All the more reason to have the process, and particularly the evidence, made public.

[phil_20686]

 gnasher, on 2015-October-12, 05:24, said:

I think the WBF's concern is that it might be a method of bringing honest players to injustice. If that occurred, it would be at least as big a problem as cheating.

Sure, but using a problem that we don't have to justify inaction about a problem which we do have is pretty silly. Its not as if we have accusations flying everywhere, there are a small number of accused pairs, all of whom seem to be obviously guilty. As far as I can see none of these cases are close to marginal. I understand that people should have the right to defend themselves, but sometimes people are just obviously guilty. I mean, if FS get off without a lifetime ban, then that just means that the WBF are failing even more egregiously than we thought!


Ultimately of course, the WBF only has legitimacy if the community of bridge players believes that it does. It is for ultimately for us to police the game ourselves, and we might delegate that to some communal authority such as an NBO, or the WBF, in order to try to obtain fairer and better procedures, but there is no requirement that we do so. Ultimately, the community of players is free just to refuse to play with certain people en masse. If we as a community believe that the WBF/our NBO has failed to adequately police our game, then we as a community are absolutely free to take policing the game back into our own hands.

BB is ultimately just the whistle-blower/figrehead, he seems to have had broad support from essentially all of his peers. The question is now, where to we go from here? I think that there is broad appetite for hearings to be open and transparent, so that we have visibility of who is being investigated, by whom, and for what. It should be routine for top level games to be video-taped, and the video's provided to the public. With widespread interest from top players it will become much much harder to cheat.