Re: Wanted: Alternate wording for Law 16Bb1(a)

Peter Smulders <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.games.bridge.laws
Message-ID <[email protected]>
At 12:00 6-2-2017,  Adam Wildavsky <[email protected]> wrote:

>Cc: Bridge Laws Mailing List <[email protected]>
>To: "Timothy N. Hill" <[email protected]>
>References: 
><CAHkRE_1SXunQ=POLUVJDOBgB9nfRjavMwP5NrRBGOktQuSsZ4A@mail.gmail.com>
>         <op.v853jxifbd67ou@bob-hp> <[email protected]>
>         <CAHkRE_2K1BhAx+zJRRXwnmvn2uxoBm=3iP=eQVPvx-XFH47uxw@mail.gmail.com>
>         <[email protected]>
>         <CAHkRE_2LDx5GXjB-utKKB8_ez22XsPvpW8_y0ReQofbEvj88FQ@mail.gmail.com>
>In-Reply-To: 
><CAHkRE_2LDx5GXjB-utKKB8_ez22XsPvpW8_y0ReQofbEvj88FQ@mail.gmail.com>
>Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 23:01:43 -0700
>Reply-To: Bridge Laws Mailing List <[email protected]>
>Message-ID: 
><CAHkRE_3aMc=2zLG_X+nWdy5OOrK0r5-C5En7b8TMxRv5G6zC_g@mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1137aa56b1d52d0547d65df1
>Subject: Re: [BLML] Wanted: Alternate wording for Law 16Bb1(a)
>Message: 1
>
>A few people pointed out a logical flaw in the "unless there is no 
>logical alternative" text. Here's a new version based on a 
>suggestion by Andy Bowles:
>
>A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably 
>suggested over another by unauthorized information unless the other 
>call or play is not a logical alternative.

"unless ... not" : this double negatives is confusing to simple minds 
like mine.
I suggest

A player may not choose a call or play that is demonstrably suggested 
over another by unauthorized information if the other call or play is 
a logical alternative.

_______________________________________________
Blml mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rtflb.org/mailman/listinfo/blml
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.