KEY PARTS OF THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE BC'S UNWRITTEN CONSTITUTION
1. The Chairman knows what's best for the club
2. The Chairman always has the last say on what the written rules of the Constitution mean
3. The chairman can change any of these rules he/she believes is in need of alteration,
modification or deletion , at any time without having to give the membership any prior
notification whatsoever
4. Ordinary members are forbidden from obtaining any knowledge of these unwritten rules
and/or any real understanding of the written rules
5. If the Chairman suspects that ordinary members have obtained forbidden knowledge or
understanding of important and highly sensitive rules , he/she has the power to gag these
members or to permanently exclude them from the club
6. The Chairman is never wrong
7. If the Chairman is ever proved to be wrong in his/her interpretation of the rules , it is due to
an unfortunate misunderstanding , which happens to be the direct result of something said
or done by irresponsible ordinary members
8. If the above applies , then these errant and wayward members must apologise immediately
for causing this misunderstanding , along with a pledge to do penance
9. An apology without a grovelling and beseeching request to receive harsh and brutal
punishment cannot be accepted as genuine
10. The Chairman is entitled to change his/her mind at any time on any issue , statement of
intent or promise
11. Ordinary members are forbidden to hold any contrary opinions or views to those held by
the Chairman , but should they share the same views they are certainly not allowed to
change them
12. Ordinary members may not in any circumstances point out that their chairman has ( a )
changed his/her mind , or worst still (b) got no mind at all
13. The Chairman has every right to be angry , upset and irrational at any time or all the time
14. Ordinary members must remain calm at all times , and be fully prepared to bite their own
tongues and suffer in silence
15. The Chairman is allowed to be ready when he/she is ready
16. Ordinary members must be ready at all times and jump to attention the moment the
Chairman issues a command
17. Committee members have no other duty but to support and back The Chairman
18. Committee members must pledge their allegiance and undying loyalty to the Chairman
19. No one must ever doubt the integrity, ability and dedication of their true and only leader
20. The office of the Chairman is a permanent position
Monday, 25 January 2016
Sunday, 24 January 2016
A VERY NEARLY TRUE STORY.......( By Bridgemeister Gibson )
Although feeling remarkably fit an extremely active 70 year old bridge player decided it would be a good idea to see his doctor for a full medical check-up. When the check had been completed the doctor said " My God man.... you really are in great shape. I can't find anything wrong with you. You'll probably be playing bridge till you're a hundred. So tell me ....how old was your father when he died ? "
" Did I say he was dead ? " came the reply.
So the doctor then asked , " How old is your father , is he still active ? "
" He's 93....he jogs daily to keep fit..... and plays bridge at least 4 or 5 times a week to keep his mind active "
" Well ....that's amazing....so how old was your grandfather when he died ?
" Did I say he was dead ? "
" Good grief....you mean to tell me that you are 70 years old and both your father and grandfather are alive ? And is your grandfather still active ?
" Yes....and all 3 of us are lifelong members of the same bridge club . In fact my 116 year old grandfather .......who has been a widower four times ....... is now marrying his very young and attractive female partner "
" Unbelievable.....but why on earth would he want to get married again... at his age ?
" Did I say he wanted to ? "
Although feeling remarkably fit an extremely active 70 year old bridge player decided it would be a good idea to see his doctor for a full medical check-up. When the check had been completed the doctor said " My God man.... you really are in great shape. I can't find anything wrong with you. You'll probably be playing bridge till you're a hundred. So tell me ....how old was your father when he died ? "
" Did I say he was dead ? " came the reply.
So the doctor then asked , " How old is your father , is he still active ? "
" He's 93....he jogs daily to keep fit..... and plays bridge at least 4 or 5 times a week to keep his mind active "
" Well ....that's amazing....so how old was your grandfather when he died ?
" Did I say he was dead ? "
" Good grief....you mean to tell me that you are 70 years old and both your father and grandfather are alive ? And is your grandfather still active ?
" Yes....and all 3 of us are lifelong members of the same bridge club . In fact my 116 year old grandfather .......who has been a widower four times ....... is now marrying his very young and attractive female partner "
" Unbelievable.....but why on earth would he want to get married again... at his age ?
" Did I say he wanted to ? "
Thursday, 21 January 2016
CONFUSED ABOUT A BID ? WELL THERE'S NO NEED TO BE IF YOU ADOPT THE PRACTICES OF THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE BC'S EXPERT PAIR
Let's face it we mortals are all victims of a bidding system where one bid can only mean one thing , when in an ideal world you would really like it to mean another.
Take for instance a typical auction where you and your partner quickly establish possession of a long solid minor suit , but with an eye on the superior 3NT contract. So when your partner introduces a heart bid for the first time at the 3 level , what message does it carry ?
Clearly , the answer depends on the initial bidding so far , what's stated on your system card , and what's your agreed bidding style. Therefore a 3H bid could mean any one of the following :
1. A four card heart suit
2. A small singleton
3. A cue bid
4. A good heart stop
5. I have half a heart stop
6. I have a really weak heart stop
So how do our resident experts manage to enjoy all 6 options , and communicate to partner which one applies to their 3H bid ? The answer is simple. It depends on the extent of their pausing , and the deep anguished pain that goes into their thinking process. And this is how it works so beautifully to their advantage.
1. Immediate confident bid = a genuine heart suit
2. Short pause , confident bid = a singleton
3. Short pause , but a more carefully considered bid = a cue bid ( possible slam interest )
4. Long pause , confident bid = a good heart stop , so bid 3NT partner if holding Qx in the suit
5. Long pause slightly pained thinking = Qx of hearts , so relay 3S partner with a good heart
stop enabling the 3NT bid to come from this side
of the table
6. An even longer pause , real agonised thinking = a weak heart stop here J10 or Jxx , so can
you help partner ( bid 3S with Qx or 3NT with Qxx )
So yes.....bridge is an easy game if you put the right elements into your bidding style , along with of course the absence of a moral conscience.
Let's face it we mortals are all victims of a bidding system where one bid can only mean one thing , when in an ideal world you would really like it to mean another.
Take for instance a typical auction where you and your partner quickly establish possession of a long solid minor suit , but with an eye on the superior 3NT contract. So when your partner introduces a heart bid for the first time at the 3 level , what message does it carry ?
Clearly , the answer depends on the initial bidding so far , what's stated on your system card , and what's your agreed bidding style. Therefore a 3H bid could mean any one of the following :
1. A four card heart suit
2. A small singleton
3. A cue bid
4. A good heart stop
5. I have half a heart stop
6. I have a really weak heart stop
So how do our resident experts manage to enjoy all 6 options , and communicate to partner which one applies to their 3H bid ? The answer is simple. It depends on the extent of their pausing , and the deep anguished pain that goes into their thinking process. And this is how it works so beautifully to their advantage.
1. Immediate confident bid = a genuine heart suit
2. Short pause , confident bid = a singleton
3. Short pause , but a more carefully considered bid = a cue bid ( possible slam interest )
4. Long pause , confident bid = a good heart stop , so bid 3NT partner if holding Qx in the suit
5. Long pause slightly pained thinking = Qx of hearts , so relay 3S partner with a good heart
stop enabling the 3NT bid to come from this side
of the table
6. An even longer pause , real agonised thinking = a weak heart stop here J10 or Jxx , so can
you help partner ( bid 3S with Qx or 3NT with Qxx )
So yes.....bridge is an easy game if you put the right elements into your bidding style , along with of course the absence of a moral conscience.
Wednesday, 20 January 2016
Tuesday, 19 January 2016
Saturday, 16 January 2016
BIGOT FACES UP TO THE JUDGE WITH SOME DIFFICULT EXPLAINING TO DO.......
Judge : Why in God's name didn't you offer Pantopod an agreed sum of damages in return for him dropping the law suit for his reinstatement as a member ?
B-J : WHAT !! Paying that toerag money would be an outrage and unforgivable sin. For years he has been the scourge of our club upsetting members left , right and center. How can courts condone the actions criminals and villains ?..... They should set about hanging them. Paying that man any sum of damages would be an act of pure INSANITY ....
Judge : Yes.....but forking out £70,000.... and planning to shell out much more.......on outrageously expensive legal costs......now that's what I call insanity
B-J : Yes....but there are certain principles at stake here which must be honoured at all costs
Judge : Like what ?
B-J : Like....not allowing the committee to be blackmailed by the threat of a law suit....like not caving in to his demands to resolve this dispute through mediation for that would be tantamount to a complete capitulation on our part.....and like standing up for what we believe was a right and just decision to expel this obnoxious Pantopod
Judge : Can you not see that these principles are nothing more than abstract ideals which fly in the face of common sense. The club happens to be a concrete reality and its members are living , breathing human beings. Some morally sound principles have to be sacrificed for the better good , which in your case is the financial survival of your club and its future existence. This fundamental and overriding concept of utilitarianism requires you to incur a short term loss or sacrifice .....to secure a much greater long term benefit. This means therefore... you have made two calamitous errors of judgement.....one in refusing mediation at the outset.... and the other , when ordered to go to mediation , by turning up....... brandishing non-negotiable pre-conditions
B-J : Hold on your honour.......you must remember......we are the ones being sued
Judge : Did it not occur to you that there were good well-founded reasons for the plaintiff wanting to seek justice ?
B-J : Pantopod was a sinner........expulsion was the punishment he rightfully deserved
Judge : But not as a consequence of the shameful manner and way you went about the disciplinary process......rules of natural justice cannot be flouted no matter who is in the frame .....and no matter what kind the misconduct he has been accused of.....
B-J : Oh dear....is that really what the law says
Judge : I'm afraid it is....and ignorance of the law is no excuse
B-J : Bugger....bugger....bugger
Judge : Why in God's name didn't you offer Pantopod an agreed sum of damages in return for him dropping the law suit for his reinstatement as a member ?
B-J : WHAT !! Paying that toerag money would be an outrage and unforgivable sin. For years he has been the scourge of our club upsetting members left , right and center. How can courts condone the actions criminals and villains ?..... They should set about hanging them. Paying that man any sum of damages would be an act of pure INSANITY ....
Judge : Yes.....but forking out £70,000.... and planning to shell out much more.......on outrageously expensive legal costs......now that's what I call insanity
B-J : Yes....but there are certain principles at stake here which must be honoured at all costs
Judge : Like what ?
B-J : Like....not allowing the committee to be blackmailed by the threat of a law suit....like not caving in to his demands to resolve this dispute through mediation for that would be tantamount to a complete capitulation on our part.....and like standing up for what we believe was a right and just decision to expel this obnoxious Pantopod
Judge : Can you not see that these principles are nothing more than abstract ideals which fly in the face of common sense. The club happens to be a concrete reality and its members are living , breathing human beings. Some morally sound principles have to be sacrificed for the better good , which in your case is the financial survival of your club and its future existence. This fundamental and overriding concept of utilitarianism requires you to incur a short term loss or sacrifice .....to secure a much greater long term benefit. This means therefore... you have made two calamitous errors of judgement.....one in refusing mediation at the outset.... and the other , when ordered to go to mediation , by turning up....... brandishing non-negotiable pre-conditions
B-J : Hold on your honour.......you must remember......we are the ones being sued
Judge : Did it not occur to you that there were good well-founded reasons for the plaintiff wanting to seek justice ?
B-J : Pantopod was a sinner........expulsion was the punishment he rightfully deserved
Judge : But not as a consequence of the shameful manner and way you went about the disciplinary process......rules of natural justice cannot be flouted no matter who is in the frame .....and no matter what kind the misconduct he has been accused of.....
B-J : Oh dear....is that really what the law says
Judge : I'm afraid it is....and ignorance of the law is no excuse
B-J : Bugger....bugger....bugger
Tuesday, 12 January 2016
Monday, 11 January 2016
Friday, 8 January 2016
NEWSFLASH : APPALLING INJUSTICE INQUIRY FINDS INJUSTICE " APPALLING "
An internal sub-committee inquiry into the shocking injustice of a club member being expelled for moving a bridgemate across the table in an inappropriate way decided a drastic overhaul of the club's disciplinary procedures was called for. Their remit was not to correct the appalling injustice but to hopefully ensure that cruel and heartless injustices like this will never happen again. The sub-committee chairman , Lloyd Whyowhy , said of this shocking tragedy " no way can we have a repeat of this , if the club is to avoid costly and crippling law suits ".
Indeed , the inquiry recommended that the following :
1. Disciplinary hearings must allow the accused member to be present in order to defend
him/her self against all listed charges , details of which adequate notice must be given
2. Internal appeals against any alleged wrongful expulsions must be heard by members who
are capable of scrutinising the questionable disciplinary procedures with clinical objectivity
3. Any perceived injustices which can be labelled as " appalling " must be reported back to
the committee as " calamities like this must never occur again .....at least for a while ".
4. The report may also include requests for something to be done or at least for something
which has the appearance of being done
5. Table money should be increased by a £1 so as to put aside money to build up slush
funds to finance legal costs
The inquiry team must draw attention to the fact that their primary duty is act in the best interests of supporting the committee , and never to demand or even suggest any change to their decisions. Their role is merely to identify and label appalling injustices purely as a matter of historical record.
An internal sub-committee inquiry into the shocking injustice of a club member being expelled for moving a bridgemate across the table in an inappropriate way decided a drastic overhaul of the club's disciplinary procedures was called for. Their remit was not to correct the appalling injustice but to hopefully ensure that cruel and heartless injustices like this will never happen again. The sub-committee chairman , Lloyd Whyowhy , said of this shocking tragedy " no way can we have a repeat of this , if the club is to avoid costly and crippling law suits ".
Indeed , the inquiry recommended that the following :
1. Disciplinary hearings must allow the accused member to be present in order to defend
him/her self against all listed charges , details of which adequate notice must be given
2. Internal appeals against any alleged wrongful expulsions must be heard by members who
are capable of scrutinising the questionable disciplinary procedures with clinical objectivity
3. Any perceived injustices which can be labelled as " appalling " must be reported back to
the committee as " calamities like this must never occur again .....at least for a while ".
4. The report may also include requests for something to be done or at least for something
which has the appearance of being done
5. Table money should be increased by a £1 so as to put aside money to build up slush
funds to finance legal costs
The inquiry team must draw attention to the fact that their primary duty is act in the best interests of supporting the committee , and never to demand or even suggest any change to their decisions. Their role is merely to identify and label appalling injustices purely as a matter of historical record.
Tuesday, 5 January 2016
SLAUGHTER HOUSE BC CREATE EVEN MORE AWARDS FOR MEMBERS INCAPABLE OF WINNING COMPETITION TROPHIES...........
Yes , Bigot-Johnson yet again has come up with exciting new awards to ensure that even more members are included in the prize giving extravaganza which immediately follows the AGM meeting :
Green Eye Award.......for the player whose envy of partner's superior skills is all too apparent
Eagle Eye Award.......for the player who spots and picks up even the smallest nuances of the
opponents' behaviour to extract crucial information about their hands
Black Eye Award.......for the unfortunate member who after being on the receiving end of his
partner's wrath picked up the biggest shiner
Eye On The Ball Award.......for the most thorough and resourceful member who never misses
out on what shenanigans the committee are up to
Eye Sore Award.........for the member whose appearance and dress sense enters the realms
of disgust , vulgarity and utmost bad taste
Half An Eye Award.....for the kind of cheat who while playing one hand is casting a look at what
cards are in play on the adjoining table
Turn A Blind Eye Award.......for the member who by pretending not to notice or comment upon
the blatant misdeameanors of others is equally at fault
Evil Eye Award...........for the player most able to make his inept partner fear for his life with just
a single glance
Yes , Bigot-Johnson yet again has come up with exciting new awards to ensure that even more members are included in the prize giving extravaganza which immediately follows the AGM meeting :
Green Eye Award.......for the player whose envy of partner's superior skills is all too apparent
Eagle Eye Award.......for the player who spots and picks up even the smallest nuances of the
opponents' behaviour to extract crucial information about their hands
Black Eye Award.......for the unfortunate member who after being on the receiving end of his
partner's wrath picked up the biggest shiner
Eye On The Ball Award.......for the most thorough and resourceful member who never misses
out on what shenanigans the committee are up to
Eye Sore Award.........for the member whose appearance and dress sense enters the realms
of disgust , vulgarity and utmost bad taste
Half An Eye Award.....for the kind of cheat who while playing one hand is casting a look at what
cards are in play on the adjoining table
Turn A Blind Eye Award.......for the member who by pretending not to notice or comment upon
the blatant misdeameanors of others is equally at fault
Evil Eye Award...........for the player most able to make his inept partner fear for his life with just
a single glance
Sunday, 3 January 2016
BIGOT-JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN OF THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE BC , DENIES IN COURT ACCUSATIONS OF LYING.........
Counsel for the plaintiff (CP) : I put it to you Bigot-Johnson that you are a liar
B-J : Are you suggesting that I am guilty of telling porkies , pooling the wool over the members' eyes , pulling fast ones , never being on the level , speaking with a forked tongue , engaging in sharp practices , creating smoke screens , spinning yarns , taking members for a ride , and talking a complete load of bollocks.......?
CP : Yes.....all of those things ......and more
B-J : Let me assure you.... and this court..... I am a man who never tells a lie
CP : Oh....so please explain then why all your written submissions contain dozens of falsehoods and gross misrepresentations of fact .......which are so far from truth as to beggar belief. You have repeatedly substituted true facts with pure fiction
B-J : I resent that accusation?....
CP : So please tell the court how do you account for the shameful discrepancies which I have unearthed during this trial ?
B-J : Listen smart arse....these documents I submitted contained no lies to my knowledge......
although I must admit....on occasions .... I was just a bit economical with the truth
CP : That Bigot is a gross understatement
B-J : Surely one is allowed to stretch the truth a bit in a bold and desperate effort to get across a point more effectively ?
CP : If only that was case....
B-J : And surely there's no harm in hedging an issue if it's not the right time to come clean. And yes.....maybe I am guilty of prevaricating a little .....
CP : Bigot.....you have no shame......you lie through your back teeth
B-J : No sir....I do not....although I must admit to some dissembling and dissimulation of the facts.....not to mention dabbling with alternative truths......but as for lying ....absolutely not
CP : Man up for once in your life , Bigot..... and admit your guilt
B-J : Well ....I am prepared to confess to making innocent and inadvertent mistakes....and getting hold of the wrong end of the stick.....perhaps based on basic assumptions to begin with being inadequate......but I have always tried to be technically accurate
CP : You can say what you like about your failings and shortcomings.... but lies are lies
B-J : Indeed there are....however .....it is my contention that the pursuit of truth is chimerical. Therefore, my guilt can only be that of pursuing the most convenient arrangement of facts which I consider to be pertinent and relevant to my ideas
CP : Bigot.....you are beyond redemption
Counsel for the plaintiff (CP) : I put it to you Bigot-Johnson that you are a liar
B-J : Are you suggesting that I am guilty of telling porkies , pooling the wool over the members' eyes , pulling fast ones , never being on the level , speaking with a forked tongue , engaging in sharp practices , creating smoke screens , spinning yarns , taking members for a ride , and talking a complete load of bollocks.......?
CP : Yes.....all of those things ......and more
B-J : Let me assure you.... and this court..... I am a man who never tells a lie
CP : Oh....so please explain then why all your written submissions contain dozens of falsehoods and gross misrepresentations of fact .......which are so far from truth as to beggar belief. You have repeatedly substituted true facts with pure fiction
B-J : I resent that accusation?....
CP : So please tell the court how do you account for the shameful discrepancies which I have unearthed during this trial ?
B-J : Listen smart arse....these documents I submitted contained no lies to my knowledge......
although I must admit....on occasions .... I was just a bit economical with the truth
CP : That Bigot is a gross understatement
B-J : Surely one is allowed to stretch the truth a bit in a bold and desperate effort to get across a point more effectively ?
CP : If only that was case....
B-J : And surely there's no harm in hedging an issue if it's not the right time to come clean. And yes.....maybe I am guilty of prevaricating a little .....
CP : Bigot.....you have no shame......you lie through your back teeth
B-J : No sir....I do not....although I must admit to some dissembling and dissimulation of the facts.....not to mention dabbling with alternative truths......but as for lying ....absolutely not
CP : Man up for once in your life , Bigot..... and admit your guilt
B-J : Well ....I am prepared to confess to making innocent and inadvertent mistakes....and getting hold of the wrong end of the stick.....perhaps based on basic assumptions to begin with being inadequate......but I have always tried to be technically accurate
CP : You can say what you like about your failings and shortcomings.... but lies are lies
B-J : Indeed there are....however .....it is my contention that the pursuit of truth is chimerical. Therefore, my guilt can only be that of pursuing the most convenient arrangement of facts which I consider to be pertinent and relevant to my ideas
CP : Bigot.....you are beyond redemption
Friday, 1 January 2016
Wednesday, 30 December 2015
Saturday, 26 December 2015
HEADLINES YOU ARE NEVER LIKELY TO SEE IN THE BIZARRE WORLD OF BRIDGE........( Article by Carp )
CHEATS TURN THEMSELVES IN AND HAND BACK ILLEGALLY WON TROPHIES
PROFESSIONAL RETURNS SPONSOR'S MONEY HAVING PLAYED SO POORLY
INCREASE IN PRIZE MONEY NOW ENABLES WINNERS TO RECOVER ENTRANCE FEES
NATIONAL SELECTORS PICK TEAM BASED PURELY ON MERIT AND ABILITY
WOMEN START TO OUT PERFORM MEN IN TOP CLASS COMPETITIONS
TOP FLIGHT PLAYERS REVERT BACK TO NATURAL BIDDING
COMMITTEES FULFILL THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT
COMMITTEE MEMBER REFRAINS FROM VOTING AFTER DECLARING A CONFLICT
OF INTEREST
BRIDGE CLUBS DELUGED WITH APPLICATIONS FROM YOUNG PEOPLE DESPERATELY KEEN TO JOIN
ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES ARE SCRAPPED IN A BOLD ATTEMPT TO RESTORE
LIFE , LAUGHTER AND EXCITEMENT BACK INTO THE GAME
CHEATS TURN THEMSELVES IN AND HAND BACK ILLEGALLY WON TROPHIES
PROFESSIONAL RETURNS SPONSOR'S MONEY HAVING PLAYED SO POORLY
INCREASE IN PRIZE MONEY NOW ENABLES WINNERS TO RECOVER ENTRANCE FEES
NATIONAL SELECTORS PICK TEAM BASED PURELY ON MERIT AND ABILITY
WOMEN START TO OUT PERFORM MEN IN TOP CLASS COMPETITIONS
TOP FLIGHT PLAYERS REVERT BACK TO NATURAL BIDDING
COMMITTEES FULFILL THEIR OBLIGATIONS TO BE OPEN AND TRANSPARENT
COMMITTEE MEMBER REFRAINS FROM VOTING AFTER DECLARING A CONFLICT
OF INTEREST
BRIDGE CLUBS DELUGED WITH APPLICATIONS FROM YOUNG PEOPLE DESPERATELY KEEN TO JOIN
ZERO TOLERANCE POLICIES ARE SCRAPPED IN A BOLD ATTEMPT TO RESTORE
LIFE , LAUGHTER AND EXCITEMENT BACK INTO THE GAME
Friday, 25 December 2015
Wednesday, 23 December 2015
DR. JOHN'S CASE NOTES : BRIDGE PLAYERS AND SELF-DECEPTION
Bridge players are renown for deceiving themselves. Indeed , this condition becomes more acute when they take up key roles on committee.
Self-deception is a state resembling but distinguishable from that of ignorance or false belief. Every player I have ever come across falsely believes he/she is an expert at the game. But of much greater concern is that decisions made by committees are claimed , quite falsely , to be outcome of an open and fair democratic process : always correct and morally right.
Sadly their self-deception consists of a motivational blindness to facts that are in some way or for some reason undesirable or unacceptable to the individuals concerned. For instance , when facts can be produced to establish to alternative argument or point of view , bridge players will choose not to see them or accept them , because they are motivated to endorse only those facts which support their chosen position.
Self-deception is a subject which fascinates philosophers as well as psycho-analysts.In an ideal world all viewpoints and decisions should be determined on the availability of correct information , plus that level of effort needed to establish all the relevant and crucial facts . However when self-deception locks in , significant facts are conveniently overlooked. Then of course there is the failure to raise relevant questions for fear of getting unacceptable answers.
A classic example which illustrates collective self-deception by committee members involved the wrongful dismissal of a Reverend from the church. The court held that there was a deliberate falsification of the hearing and of the evidence concerned. This view was supported by the fact that not one of 38 unsolicited letters of recommendation for the Reverend received by the panel from his former congregants was entered into the final report , or even referred to in discussions. This was simply because of their positive and glowing support for the Reverend and his ministry. Yet all 4 of the solicited letters against the Reverend , obtained during the proceedings, were reproduced in the report having been declared at face value as legitimate evidence.
All this self-deception can be psychologically explained as the unconscious distortion of the appreciation of a state of affairs to satisfy the individual's own motives. In practice self-deception quickly manifests itself into bad faith, by which most opinions and decisions are predetermined , as opposed to being freely chosen by those with open minds , moral integrity and with no personal agendas or axes to grind.
Bridge players are renown for deceiving themselves. Indeed , this condition becomes more acute when they take up key roles on committee.
Self-deception is a state resembling but distinguishable from that of ignorance or false belief. Every player I have ever come across falsely believes he/she is an expert at the game. But of much greater concern is that decisions made by committees are claimed , quite falsely , to be outcome of an open and fair democratic process : always correct and morally right.
Sadly their self-deception consists of a motivational blindness to facts that are in some way or for some reason undesirable or unacceptable to the individuals concerned. For instance , when facts can be produced to establish to alternative argument or point of view , bridge players will choose not to see them or accept them , because they are motivated to endorse only those facts which support their chosen position.
Self-deception is a subject which fascinates philosophers as well as psycho-analysts.In an ideal world all viewpoints and decisions should be determined on the availability of correct information , plus that level of effort needed to establish all the relevant and crucial facts . However when self-deception locks in , significant facts are conveniently overlooked. Then of course there is the failure to raise relevant questions for fear of getting unacceptable answers.
A classic example which illustrates collective self-deception by committee members involved the wrongful dismissal of a Reverend from the church. The court held that there was a deliberate falsification of the hearing and of the evidence concerned. This view was supported by the fact that not one of 38 unsolicited letters of recommendation for the Reverend received by the panel from his former congregants was entered into the final report , or even referred to in discussions. This was simply because of their positive and glowing support for the Reverend and his ministry. Yet all 4 of the solicited letters against the Reverend , obtained during the proceedings, were reproduced in the report having been declared at face value as legitimate evidence.
All this self-deception can be psychologically explained as the unconscious distortion of the appreciation of a state of affairs to satisfy the individual's own motives. In practice self-deception quickly manifests itself into bad faith, by which most opinions and decisions are predetermined , as opposed to being freely chosen by those with open minds , moral integrity and with no personal agendas or axes to grind.
Tuesday, 22 December 2015
" DON'T CALL HIM STUPID " : THE WALNUT TREE ALLOTMENT SOCIETY BC DISCIPLINARY HEARING No.238
( Within days of his last disciplinary , he was back in front of the disciplinary committee having foul-mouthed an opponent at the table. )
Chairman ( C ) : Did you or did you not call your opponent Arthur Brayne " stupid "
B-J : I certainly did....for I am a man who speaks the truth
C : That may be so....but in this club we do not insult opponents..... or direct foul and abusive language at them. Zero tolerance rules apply to all members....including you
B-J : Well ....the fool asked a rather inviting question as to what I thought of him as a person given my contempt for him as a player.......and being a man who believes in brevity I thought " stupid " completely summed him up in just one simple easy-to-understand word
C : But you can't do that.....it was an insult.....cruel and heartless
B-J : Excuse me....we know all that the truth hurts..... but stupid is what he is. In fact he should have treated it as a compliment because quite frankly he plays bridge like a moron .....never able to grasp even basic ideas or instructions
C : Really ?
B-J : Yes really....you see being stupid is not having or showing an ability to absorb ideas readily. Moreover a stupid man is marked by his lack of intellectual acuity. Therefore , if these definitions were applied to him they would be compliments..... because the extent of his stupidity defies belief
C : Well.....even if that was the case..... political correctness forbids the use of such a word which brutally portrays him a complete jackass
B-J : Perhaps you're right.....it may have been better to describe old Arthur as " not the sharpest tool in the box "......or " having too much yardage between the goal posts ".....or better still " the wheel is spinning but the hamster's dead "
C : Exactly....because no way would Arthur understand what the hell these statements actually mean. And blissful ignorance would have resulted in no complaint being lodged against you
B-J : Ah well.....I must remember to do that the next time I sit down and play against this numpty
C : Sorry to say this......but there wont be a next time for a while.... that is until your 6 month suspension has been completed
B-J : Bugger...
( Within days of his last disciplinary , he was back in front of the disciplinary committee having foul-mouthed an opponent at the table. )
Chairman ( C ) : Did you or did you not call your opponent Arthur Brayne " stupid "
B-J : I certainly did....for I am a man who speaks the truth
C : That may be so....but in this club we do not insult opponents..... or direct foul and abusive language at them. Zero tolerance rules apply to all members....including you
B-J : Well ....the fool asked a rather inviting question as to what I thought of him as a person given my contempt for him as a player.......and being a man who believes in brevity I thought " stupid " completely summed him up in just one simple easy-to-understand word
C : But you can't do that.....it was an insult.....cruel and heartless
B-J : Excuse me....we know all that the truth hurts..... but stupid is what he is. In fact he should have treated it as a compliment because quite frankly he plays bridge like a moron .....never able to grasp even basic ideas or instructions
C : Really ?
B-J : Yes really....you see being stupid is not having or showing an ability to absorb ideas readily. Moreover a stupid man is marked by his lack of intellectual acuity. Therefore , if these definitions were applied to him they would be compliments..... because the extent of his stupidity defies belief
C : Well.....even if that was the case..... political correctness forbids the use of such a word which brutally portrays him a complete jackass
B-J : Perhaps you're right.....it may have been better to describe old Arthur as " not the sharpest tool in the box "......or " having too much yardage between the goal posts ".....or better still " the wheel is spinning but the hamster's dead "
C : Exactly....because no way would Arthur understand what the hell these statements actually mean. And blissful ignorance would have resulted in no complaint being lodged against you
B-J : Ah well.....I must remember to do that the next time I sit down and play against this numpty
C : Sorry to say this......but there wont be a next time for a while.... that is until your 6 month suspension has been completed
B-J : Bugger...
Sunday, 20 December 2015
WALNUT TREE ALLOTMENT SOCIETY BC DISCIPLINARY HEARING No. 236...........
( Following a near-miss incident which happened when an irate Bigot-Johnson picked up a bridgemate and hurled it across a crowded room, the club committee ordered him to attend a disciplinary hearing. Many members believed Bigot was destined to be kicked out , but the great man rose to the challenge of defending himself with great success. The following exchange of words demonstrates the wonderful way a philosophical argument can triumph in the face of adversity ).
Chairman (C ) : What we witnessed the other day was an act of reckless disregard for the safety of others . And we the committee consider this hurling of a bridgemate across a crowded room to be offensive and aggressive. One can only define it as an assault with a deadly weapon.
B-J : That sir is an outrageous suggestion , and I shall prove to you that my actions were both innocent and harmless
C : Oh please enlighten us as to why you think you have done nothing wrong ?
B-J : Well , let's start with a irrefutable fact that.....when a bridgemate is at rest it occupies a space equal to its own dimensions
C : Yes....that's true
B-J : Moreover , when a bridge is at rest it is completely harmless and safe
C : I couldn't agree more
B-J : So do you accept that when a bridgemate is in flight , at any given moment in time it still occupies a space equal to its dimensions
C : Yes....that must also be true
B-J : Therefore , it is correct to say that throughout its whole flight the bridgemate occupies an infinite number spaces all equal to its dimensions...... and in each space it is of course at rest , making it harmless and safe
C : Yes....I suppose so
B-J : Therefore this argument proves the bridgement is forever at rest even in flight , being no danger or risk to anybody at any time
C : I have followed the logic of your argument and even though I am obliged to accept it as a valid defence to the charge made against you , I remain perplexed as to why I have come to this hideous conclusion .....one that seems utterly absurd and wrong
B-J : Well, that how it goes when a numpty like you falls victim to a philosophical paradox
( Following a near-miss incident which happened when an irate Bigot-Johnson picked up a bridgemate and hurled it across a crowded room, the club committee ordered him to attend a disciplinary hearing. Many members believed Bigot was destined to be kicked out , but the great man rose to the challenge of defending himself with great success. The following exchange of words demonstrates the wonderful way a philosophical argument can triumph in the face of adversity ).
Chairman (C ) : What we witnessed the other day was an act of reckless disregard for the safety of others . And we the committee consider this hurling of a bridgemate across a crowded room to be offensive and aggressive. One can only define it as an assault with a deadly weapon.
B-J : That sir is an outrageous suggestion , and I shall prove to you that my actions were both innocent and harmless
C : Oh please enlighten us as to why you think you have done nothing wrong ?
B-J : Well , let's start with a irrefutable fact that.....when a bridgemate is at rest it occupies a space equal to its own dimensions
C : Yes....that's true
B-J : Moreover , when a bridge is at rest it is completely harmless and safe
C : I couldn't agree more
B-J : So do you accept that when a bridgemate is in flight , at any given moment in time it still occupies a space equal to its dimensions
C : Yes....that must also be true
B-J : Therefore , it is correct to say that throughout its whole flight the bridgemate occupies an infinite number spaces all equal to its dimensions...... and in each space it is of course at rest , making it harmless and safe
C : Yes....I suppose so
B-J : Therefore this argument proves the bridgement is forever at rest even in flight , being no danger or risk to anybody at any time
C : I have followed the logic of your argument and even though I am obliged to accept it as a valid defence to the charge made against you , I remain perplexed as to why I have come to this hideous conclusion .....one that seems utterly absurd and wrong
B-J : Well, that how it goes when a numpty like you falls victim to a philosophical paradox
Saturday, 19 December 2015
THE SLAUGHTER HOUSE BRIDGE CLUB'S NUMEROUS SUB-COMMITTEES
Chairman , Bigot-Johnson , has always been a great believer in forming specialist sub-committees to handle difficult and demanding tasks , which of course enables the main committee to focus on the broader policy issues.
Over the years the club has created and developed well over 20 sub-committees , which have all proved indispensable in Bigot-Johnson's quest to run the place with absolute control and ruthless efficiency. The responsibilities and tasks carried out by these extremely important sub-committees are listed below:
1. Inventing limp but plausible excuses
2. Blame avoidance and transference
3. Covert operations
4. Investigations into members' alleged misconduct
5. Theatrical productions and re-enactments
6. Frame-ups and fit-ups
7. Character assassinations
8 Publication and dissemination of propaganda
9. Contracts and indemnity clauses
10. Removal and disposal of incriminating evidence
11. Knee-jerk reactions
12. AGM vote rigging
13. Applications vetting and reviews
14. Internal surveillance and security
15. Preparation and storage of dossiers on members
16. Incognito ad hoc activities
17. Reckless spending projects
18. Fund raising for lawyers' fees
19. Reviewing oversights and cover ups
20. Circumventing club rules and regulations
21. Coordinating the work of sub-committees
22. Performance and appraisal ( of sub-committee members )
23. Ideas and development for new sub-committees
24. Slush fund budgeting
Chairman , Bigot-Johnson , has always been a great believer in forming specialist sub-committees to handle difficult and demanding tasks , which of course enables the main committee to focus on the broader policy issues.
Over the years the club has created and developed well over 20 sub-committees , which have all proved indispensable in Bigot-Johnson's quest to run the place with absolute control and ruthless efficiency. The responsibilities and tasks carried out by these extremely important sub-committees are listed below:
1. Inventing limp but plausible excuses
2. Blame avoidance and transference
3. Covert operations
4. Investigations into members' alleged misconduct
5. Theatrical productions and re-enactments
6. Frame-ups and fit-ups
7. Character assassinations
8 Publication and dissemination of propaganda
9. Contracts and indemnity clauses
10. Removal and disposal of incriminating evidence
11. Knee-jerk reactions
12. AGM vote rigging
13. Applications vetting and reviews
14. Internal surveillance and security
15. Preparation and storage of dossiers on members
16. Incognito ad hoc activities
17. Reckless spending projects
18. Fund raising for lawyers' fees
19. Reviewing oversights and cover ups
20. Circumventing club rules and regulations
21. Coordinating the work of sub-committees
22. Performance and appraisal ( of sub-committee members )
23. Ideas and development for new sub-committees
24. Slush fund budgeting
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)