[bluejak]

There are always some people who want to ask why the rules are the rules, rather than what the rules are, and whether something different might be better. When we were with our previous host, Bridgetalk, there were some forums not run by Ed and myself that were very suitable for this. Now we are hosted by BBO it is a little different, since the forums we do not host have a definite and very understandable bias towards online bridge. Also, this forum was also getting a little stale, since the 2007 Laws have been around for some time. Perhaps we are getting to the stage where some people want to look forward to the next Laws.

There is also the question of Regulations. While we answer questions on Regulations, eg whether an agreement is permitted or alertable, again some people wish to suggest new ideas.

So this forum is to understand changes that have occurred in both Laws and Regulations. Also to suggest changes that might be made. While we cannot guarantee anyone will listen to our ideas, at least if we discuss them thoroughly and make them sensible and consistent authorities might be more willing to listen. As always, we ask initial posters to quote a jurisdiction. This is even more important where Regulations are concerned since they are not consistent between jurisdictions.

However, a word of warning. This is not meant to be an alternative to the bridge-laws mailing list, BLML. We are not looking for petty ideas which could be argued from an overly pedantic approach: this forum is still meant [as the other ones here] for people who want to understand in fairly simple fashion why Laws & Regulations have become what they are, to suggest sensible improvements, or to find out why what they think are improvements will not work.