|
Home > Archive > Chess politics > September 2004 > Old Haasie's 2nd Tour on ICC
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Old Haasie's 2nd Tour on ICC
|
|
| HAASpittle 2004-09-21, 6:50 am |
| I rejoined ICC about a month ago after a few years away. I'm thorougnly
enjoying the experience ... which includes too many bashings from slicked up
1600 level blitz players. More so than ever I can see how ICC has taken away
USCF'ers.
In order for me to play USCF otb, I'd have to fork over about $50, then
travel all the way to St. Pete, pay another $20 or $25 to play in one of their
dinky tornadoes, where I might have a shot at a $30 prize, and otherwise risk
rating points which would cost still more time and money to recover, etc. At
least on ICC my frequent losing streaks eventually give way to winning streaks
and I can test experimental lines of play with no more consequences than a loss
of game and rating points.
No wonder USCF's core of otb players hovers around 6000 to 8000 and is
concentrated in mostly the largest metro chess markets.
Old Haasie
| |
| Jane Adams 2004-09-21, 6:50 am |
| ICC is definitely great, but the real reason for the debacle at USCF is the
lack of ethics on the part of those who should have the highest standards,
and take care to preserve the game for future generations by promoting the
game with courtesy and elan.
The politicians, and the peripheral politicians (some envious, loser TDs)
who make it a point to try to destroy the competition for ratings fees
processed by USCF with their childish antics of the past nearly twenty
years, have diminished the overall player base, NOT ICC.
It is true that the contrast between ICC and USCF is enormous. On ICC you
are treated with dignity and respect, at USCF you are viewed as a skunk at a
wedding if they don't recognize you by their now infamous secret handshake.
On ICC, you get value for your money, at USCF you get ripped at every turn
with higher than retail prices from our supposed member benefit, books &
equipment, lousy service at the office level, inefficient ways and means.
On ICC, if someone gives you a hard time (deserved or not), you can just
censor them and live your life in peace while enjoying your 49 bucks worth,
at USCF you have to stop going to tournaments to avoid the bullies.
Don't be fooled by 'Old Haasie's' attempt to play the role of Pa Walton
either. I suspect he really knows the truth.
Jane
http://users.lvcm.com/jadams
"HAASpittle" <haaspittle@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040919111024.11378.00000587@mb-m15.aol.com...
quote:
> I rejoined ICC about a month ago after a few years away. I'm
thorougnly
quote:
> enjoying the experience ... which includes too many bashings from slicked
up
quote:
> 1600 level blitz players. More so than ever I can see how ICC has taken
away
quote:
> USCF'ers.
> In order for me to play USCF otb, I'd have to fork over about $50, then
> travel all the way to St. Pete, pay another $20 or $25 to play in one of
their
quote:
> dinky tornadoes, where I might have a shot at a $30 prize, and otherwise
risk
quote:
> rating points which would cost still more time and money to recover, etc.
At
quote:
> least on ICC my frequent losing streaks eventually give way to winning
streaks
quote:
> and I can test experimental lines of play with no more consequences than a
loss
quote:
> of game and rating points.
> No wonder USCF's core of otb players hovers around 6000 to 8000 and is
> concentrated in mostly the largest metro chess markets.
>
> Old Haasie
| |
|
|
"Jane Adams" <jadams@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:oWh3d.278089$Lj.56085@fed1read03...
quote:
> ICC is definitely great, but the real reason for the debacle at USCF is
the
quote:
> lack of ethics on the part of those who should have the highest standards,
> and take care to preserve the game for future generations by promoting the
> game with courtesy and elan.
I notice that they are advertising for a new ED. The current one who works
60 hour weeks and has a vested interest in many of their decisions. He can't
be too happy about this turn of events.
They are beyond the point of needing an ED. A good office manager is all
they need. Let the board be responsible for the glad-handing. I hope Judy
Misner applies for the job.
| |
| Ray Gordon 2004-09-21, 6:50 am |
| > I rejoined ICC about a month ago after a few years away. I'm
thorougnly
quote:
> enjoying the experience ... which includes too many bashings from slicked
up
quote:
> 1600 level blitz players. More so than ever I can see how ICC has taken
away
quote:
> USCF'ers.
> In order for me to play USCF otb, I'd have to fork over about $50, then
> travel all the way to St. Pete, pay another $20 or $25 to play in one of
their
quote:
> dinky tornadoes, where I might have a shot at a $30 prize, and otherwise
risk
quote:
> rating points which would cost still more time and money to recover, etc.
At
quote:
> least on ICC my frequent losing streaks eventually give way to winning
streaks
quote:
> and I can test experimental lines of play with no more consequences than a
loss
quote:
> of game and rating points.
> No wonder USCF's core of otb players hovers around 6000 to 8000 and is
> concentrated in mostly the largest metro chess markets.
Not only that, but the ICC interface can act as a referee, and players who
win a lot against their friends can have their delusions of being "strong
players" shattered (or confirmed) by the ICC rating system.
USCF has missed the boat with online chess. ICC is definitely *the* place
to play. Like Washington Square Park and the Manhattan Chess Club all
rolled into one.
| |
| Angelo DePalma 2004-09-21, 6:50 am |
| I've followed this thread and similar ones in the past with great interest.
ICC could be a much better place to play if they had a windows-based
interface with full menus for all functions. I still don't know how to join
a tournament (I used to, but I've forgotten). I don't know how to turn down
all the chatter. Forget about libraries, etc. It's way, way too confusing.
I'm also not so keen on ICC's girlie-man atmosphere. I understand
politeness, but you can't even say "shit on you" without getting a stern
note from the ops. I don't understand why people don't just put me on censor
if they don't like my chatting. You can't hurt anyone by cursing them
through the computer.
I've been warned several times about this by management, who have threatened
to bar me for life, so I've given up chatting w/ opponents. The other day,
however, someone said "lucky" after I won a game from him. Now this guy, who
played like a girl (Rossolimo, KIA, you name it) was rated about 1850 or so
and I've been rated as high as 2100 on there, so I told him to go to hell
and the next thing I knew he was messaging me half a dozen times because of
my language, threatening to tell his mommy on me.
Hey, if you're reading this, you pathetic XXXXXXX, GO XXXX YOURSELF.
Anyway, ICC could also sell chess-related content, such as lessons, but it
doesn't seem interested in this aspect of building a chess community. I
wonder why?
adp
"Ray Gordon" <ray@cybersheet.com> wrote in message
news:2fj3d.3898$4j1.947@trndny06...
quote:
> thorougnly
> up
> away
> their
> risk
> At
> streaks
> loss
>
> Not only that, but the ICC interface can act as a referee, and players who
> win a lot against their friends can have their delusions of being "strong
> players" shattered (or confirmed) by the ICC rating system.
>
> USCF has missed the boat with online chess. ICC is definitely *the* place
> to play. Like Washington Square Park and the Manhattan Chess Club all
> rolled into one.
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"Angelo DePalma" <adpspammersgotohell@tellurian.net> wrote in message
news:fIudnfXZnuiLYdDcRVn-oQ@garden.net...
quote:
>
> Hey, if you're reading this, you pathetic XXXXXXX, GO XXXX YOURSELF.
Next time be a little harder on him.
| |
| Jane Adams 2004-09-21, 6:50 am |
| Gee whiz Angelo,
Have you ever heard the phrase, "You get more flies with honey than with
vinegar"?
What's wrong with maintaining your fighting spirit, while honoring the
chivalrous goals of taste, decorum, courtesy and elan?
Girlie-men? I think not. Your kind has spawned a nation of hateful devils.
Jane
http://users.lvcm.com/jadams
"Angelo DePalma" <adpspammersgotohell@tellurian.net> wrote in message
news:78qdnUCFq4a5ytPcRVn-gw@garden.net...
quote:
>
> Stan,
>
> I think "go to hell" is probably my limit, and then only in response to
> "fighting words." Any more and I'm out of there permanently. It's a sad
> situation. We're becoming a nation of girlie-men. Nay, a XXXXing nation of
> XXXXing girlie-men.
>
> My days of telling people they play like girls, and then responding "XXXX
> you, you computer-using cocksucker" to their "?" queries are over. You
could
quote:
> say an era on ICC has ended, at least for me.
>
> And to all of you who agree with ICC management that cursing and swearing
> have no place on an Internet (!) server, I say:
>
> "Phukko youo, tu madre, y votres enfants terrible. Nada, pravda, no pichu,
> va PISDA!!!"
>
> (Loosely translated as, "I respectfully beg to differ.")
>
> Angelo
>
> PS Hey Stan, where are you from? You seem like a reasonable guy. Pravda
> pikko, na bichu. 
> "StanB" <stanbooz@comXXXcast.net> wrote in message
> news:xIidneMVs5XNhtPcRVn-pw@comcast.com...
>
>
| |
| Kenneth Sloan 2004-09-21, 6:50 am |
| "StanB" <stanbooz@comXXXcast.net> writes:
quote:
> "Angelo DePalma" <adpspammersgotohell@tellurian.net> wrote in message
> news:78qdnUCFq4a5ytPcRVn-gw@garden.net...
>
>
> Philly burbs.
That's redundant.
quote:
>
>
--
Kenneth Sloan sloan@uab.edu
Computer and Information Sciences (205) 934-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX (205) 934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/
| |
| TheBOBSFan 2004-09-21, 6:50 am |
|
"StanB" <stanbooz@comXXXcast.net> wrote in message news:IcSdnS580atU_NLcRVn-qQ@comcast.com...
quote:
>
> "Jane Adams" <jadams@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:Zlt3d.280658$Lj.235033@fed1read03...
>
>
> Have you ever heard the phrase, "You get more flies with shit than honey"?
>
>
> Hateful devils? I think not. There is far less bigotry and hate nowadays
> than when I was growing up.
>
There might be just as much, just redistributed.
TBF
| |
| Angelo DePalma 2004-09-28, 6:49 am |
|
"zdrakec" <zdrakec@yahoo.com> wrote
quote:
> One of the nicer aspects of the ICC, is that the rest of us don't
> necessarily have to put up with it if we don't want.
My point exactly.
quote:
> Of course, this discussion wouldn't be happening if he were capable of
> growing up just a little.
Waaaaaaaaaaa! I see a flame war coming on.
quote:
> The beauty of it is, with every flame he exhales towards Jane or,
> possibly, myself, he drives my point home.
And when did I flame either one of you?
quote:
> Despite motherless cretins such as Angelo, however, the ICC remains
> chessplayers' heaven!
And this qualifies as a non-flame, by an innocent observer.
quote:
> Cheers,
> zdrakec
Nothing more "mature" and "un-motherless" and "uncretinish" than using a
pseudonym eh?
Paradnie, fluka, shittolo excrementum ex post facto, hijo de cucaracha!!
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
>
> "Angelo DePalma" <adpspammersgotohell@tellurian.net> wrote in
> news:z6udnbtQMsZdUNPcRVn-rQ@garden.net:
>
| |
| David Bohm 2004-09-29, 12:45 am |
|
"Martin Wilber" <martinwilber@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1bbc8b2caebcef2e989700@news.chi.sbcglobal.net...
quote:
> But ICC is great for getting a chance to play against GMs and IMs.
> Yesterday I played several material odds games against Larry
> Christiansen.
What kind of odds did you have to give him?
David Bohm
|
| |
|
|