[jallerton]

There have been many suggestions from various people that the wording of particular Laws could be improved. Some people have suggested that certain Laws are ambiguous and/or conflict with other Laws.

How will the wording of the next Laws be determined? Do the National Bridge Organisations have any input?

If a player has a suggested improvement, how should the player communciate his or her suggestion for 2017?

[bluejak]

NBOs certainly have input. How much effect the input has is somewhat dubious.

In England, the L&EC will certainly discuss proposed Laws and make recommendations. They listen to anything put to them.

I am not saying it will have any effect, but Grattan Endicott, the WBFLC Secretary, is always willing to listen to things put to him direct.

[nige1]

jallerton, on Mar 13 2010, 02:05 PM, said:

There have been many suggestions from various people that the wording of particular Laws could be improved.  Some people have suggested that certain Laws are ambiguous and/or conflict with other Laws.
How will the wording of the next Laws be determined?  Do the National Bridge Organisations have any input?
If a player has a suggested improvement, how should the player communciate his or her suggestion for 2017?

IMO, The WBFLC's deliberations would be enhanced by an official WBF discussion forum, like this. Suggested topics:

• Polls on changes.
  
• Glossary and abbreviations to define and restrict a vocabulary to specify laws; also a meta-vocabulary for discussing laws.
  
• Each current law with suggestions for clarification, improvement, or radical change.
  
• Each regulation that (arguably) should be incorporated into the laws.
  
• Questions of General philosophy. For example ...
  • Should the laws be simpler and less sophisticated, so that more directors and some players could understand them. Can this be done without destroying the nature of the game and players' enjoyment of it?
    
  • Should laws rely less on the subjective judgement? For example, should an attempt be made to reduce reliance on directors' telepathic skills?
    
  • Is Equity (restoring the status quo) enough or should there also be an element of deterrence?
    
  • Should the laws provide comprehensive and universal defaults (if necessary with opt-out clauses for bolshy chauvinistic local legislatures)?

This would provide a mechanism for ordinary players to add their tuppence worth to the suggestions of top administrators and directors. The WBFLC would consider suggestions but would, of course, be free to ignore them.