|
Home > Archive > Chess politics > February 2005 > Chess-live. Notebanned and muted Truong
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 |
Chess-live. Notebanned and muted Truong
|
|
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-11, 5:53 pm |
| I used to be a Senior Admin BarbaraVilliers On Chess-Live. I am the
person Truong called a XXXXX here on Google using the pseudo name of
Rafael Rodriguez. A bunch of mindless bullies are controlling Arclight
the HA.The despised Paul Troung aka lots of dupes including ManOfStyle
and his henchman Amsterdoom are helping him.
This is a nice server with many decent admins and other staff. Lots
more about Truong and Polgar to come I have many logs (the one where
Truong discusses a professional female player is an education). I am
muted and notebanned for daring to stand up to this moronic mindless
clique who silence anyone for daring to oppose the draconian bans and
muting of paying members. Most of the admins are petrified of the
gruesome twosome. However I am not and am happy to spread the new about
Paul Truong, Susan Polgar and Amsterdoom their sidekick
Auto-flagging.
You have been added to the noteban list by ChessLiveDirector.
Either remove them or I will ban the notes. You were a staff here. You
know better
Either remove them or I will ban the notes. You were a staff here. You
know better than to put notes as such. Thanks for your cooperation.
| Chess Live Home | View Profiles | My Account | Logout | | My
Profile | Edit My Profile | My Games | BarbaraVilliers (UK)Basics Real
Name: Louise Scarlett Sinclair
Email Address: ladyMavericke@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk
Home Page: www.eustonhall.co.uk/Eus...
Location: London
Age: 42
Occupation: Antique dealer, writer
School: expelled
More about BarbaraVilliersI am a tough ruthless individual. I dislike
"wimmens chess" and scandalised my league by refusing to play in 4NCL
as although I like and respect the organisers I disagree with the PC
womens board. At home I avoid domestics and spend my time playing chess
and working out money making schemes. I live in a purple house with
Gary who also plays chess and numerous cats and two snakes. Gary and I
often quarrel about chess which makes life interesting. As a player who
happens to be female I refuse to defer to men who invariably think they
know better. This has caused a few disputes but I can honestly say that
I am unrepentant. I loathe all forms of political correctness and
consider it to be Stalinist in nature. I treat people as they behave
with me. I do not consider ethnicity, gender, culture and other
irrelevancies very important. My politics are right wing and if the lib
bleeding hearts can't tolerate my views then tough luck! I have Irish,
Scottish, Welsh, French and German Jewish blood from my maternal
Grandfather and some relatives perished in the holocaust, I have never
stated that the Holocaust was a hoax.I know it happened. Years ago I
quit smoking and eating meat (I still eat fish) The temptation to
resume these activities to cock a snook at the Politically correct
morons is almost overwhelming.Actually I gave way to temptation
recently, and devoured a steak and kidney pie. I'm planning further
gastronomic delights LOL. I love real fur coats, gas guzzling cars annd
money. Extravagance and bling are commendable. Frugality is not in my
vocabulary. Neither are the popular buzz words of today. I enjoy
cursing when I get annoyed and if a guy sexually harassed me I wouldn't
bother with the courts as a quick knee in the cojones is highly
effective. Generally I prefer men to women as the latter tend to be so
giggly and coy. I dislike the so called sensitivity they force the rest
of us to endure. I am told my politics are to the right of Attila the
Hun and the lady's not for turning!!!!! My home page shows another
determined woman. A distant family connection of mine who I greatly
admire for her use of her wit, sexuality and beauty to succeed in a
mans world!
AccomplishmentsI have written a book, my writing has been published and
I have appeared on Television. not bad for a maverick who was expelled
from school aged 15. The school was only a bog standard Comprehensive,
I considered expulsion a career move. I am accustomed to getting my own
way and failure is not a word used in my vocabulary. I bought my house
aged 24 and own a Jaguar car. I run my own businness and have never
ventured into the nine to five world. I survived cancer at 26 and enjoy
a thoroughly eccentric lifestyle.I often irritate people as I am
straight to the point and can't be bothered to use polite euphemisms.
But you know where you stand with me. I was fired from my position of
Head Of Support and Senior Admin by Arclight on the 6th of February
2005. Since then I have learned who my friends are on Chess-Live. "A
friend is someone who hasn't stabbed you in the back-yet"
| |
| Tim Hanke 2005-02-11, 5:53 pm |
| "BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108113724.307082.59870@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>I used to be a Senior Admin BarbaraVilliers On Chess-Live. I am the
> person Truong called a XXXXX here on Google using the pseudo name of
> Rafael Rodriguez. A bunch of mindless bullies are controlling Arclight
> the HA.The despised Paul Troung aka lots of dupes including ManOfStyle
> and his henchman Amsterdoom are helping him.
> This is a nice server with many decent admins and other staff. Lots
> more about Truong and Polgar to come I have many logs (the one where
> Truong discusses a professional female player is an education). I am
> muted and notebanned for daring to stand up to this moronic mindless
> clique who silence anyone for daring to oppose the draconian bans and
> muting of paying members. Most of the admins are petrified of the
> gruesome twosome. However I am not and am happy to spread the new about
> Paul Truong, Susan Polgar and Amsterdoom their sidekick
Truong & Polgar make a lasting impression wherever they go.
Tim Hanke
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-11, 5:53 pm |
|
"Tim Hanke" <timothyhanke@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:zbidnbmpQsofbJHfRVn-ug@comcast.com...
quote:
> "BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1108113724.307082.59870@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Truong & Polgar make a lasting impression wherever they go.
>
> Tim Hanke
So does USCF Tim
Which is why USCF is heartily detested by all professional chess managers,
GMs, sponsors and partnerships.
You have none of those in the fold, right?
Phil Innes
| |
|
| You know, Tim, I hadn't bothered responding to the BarbaraVilliers message
because I assumed that people would naturally dismiss an angry rant from a
disgruntled former staff member for what it is. However, you have never
been a friend of Chess Live and obviously couldn't resist a change to take
another poke in our direction.
To set the record straight, Truong & Polgar have done more for our
competitors, playchess.com, ICC, and WCN, than they have ever done for us.
Frankly I wish they would get more involved because I've seen them both do a
great deal for chess. Remember all the naysayers when Paul Truong was
trying to organize the U.S. Women's Olympiad Team? Well look at the
results!
And GM Susan Polgar? She would be well admired by chess players
everywhere--and especially women--if all she ever did was play chess, but
she has also worked very hard lately to promote the development of our next
generation of chess players. As the most family-friendy of the Internet
chess servers (thanks in no small part to the demands of our original
partners at the USCF), Chess Live would strongly welcome Susan Polgar's
increased participation. She's done just a single lecture for us in the
last six months, but that lecture attracted the largest crowd we experienced
during that entire period.
Make rude comments if you want, but I hope the readers here will take your
comments for what they're worth.
Joel
"Tim Hanke" <timothyhanke@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:zbidnbmpQsofbJHfRVn-ug@comcast.com...
quote:
> "BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1108113724.307082.59870@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Truong & Polgar make a lasting impression wherever they go.
>
> Tim Hanke
>
| |
| Tim Hanke 2005-02-11, 5:53 pm |
| "Joel" <zork@chess-live.com> wrote ...
quote:
> You know, Tim, I hadn't bothered responding to the BarbaraVilliers message
> because I assumed that people would naturally dismiss an angry rant from a
> disgruntled former staff member for what it is. However, you have never
> been a friend of Chess Live and obviously couldn't resist a change to take
> another poke in our direction.
Don't flatter yourself, I was not taking a poke against Chess Live. I have
nothing against Chess Live.
quote:
> To set the record straight, Truong & Polgar have done more for our
> competitors, playchess.com, ICC, and WCN, than they have ever done for us.
> Frankly I wish they would get more involved because I've seen them both do
> a great deal for chess. Remember all the naysayers when Paul Truong was
> trying to organize the U.S. Women's Olympiad Team? Well look at the
> results!
If all you care about are results, narrowly defined, I wish you well. They
say Hitler had great results at reviving the German economy, too, but that
doesn't make him a good person.
quote:
> And GM Susan Polgar? She would be well admired by chess players
> everywhere--and especially women--if all she ever did was play chess, but
> she has also worked very hard lately to promote the development of our
> next generation of chess players. As the most family-friendy of the
> Internet chess servers (thanks in no small part to the demands of our
> original partners at the USCF), Chess Live would strongly welcome Susan
> Polgar's increased participation. She's done just a single lecture for us
> in the last six months, but that lecture attracted the largest crowd we
> experienced during that entire period.
I imagine Bobby Fischer would attract an even bigger crowd, but that doesn't
mean Fischer is an admirable person.
quote:
> Make rude comments if you want, but I hope the readers here will take your
> comments for what they're worth.
I, too, hope the readers here will take my comments for what they are worth.
Tim Hanke
quote:
> Joel
>
> "Tim Hanke" <timothyhanke@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:zbidnbmpQsofbJHfRVn-ug@comcast.com...
>
>
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-11, 5:53 pm |
|
"Tim Hanke" <timothyhanke@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6sCdnSFtAdsdh5DfRVn-qw@comcast.com...
quote:
> "Joel" <zork@chess-live.com> wrote ...
>
> If all you care about are results, narrowly defined, I wish you well. They
> say Hitler had great results at reviving the German economy, too, but that
> doesn't make him a good person.
Here it is. The first ever medal for a US woman's team, and all Tim Hanke
can do is make an immediate comparison with Adolf Hitler, based on some
comparison of efficiencies to achieve a task, and no other comment!!
That's USCF board level talk. No partners, no sponsors, no public plans
arrayed before a 'membership organisation', and in fact, very few friends of
any stripe who could be said to be disinterested in their own fortunes.
quote:
>
> I imagine Bobby Fischer would attract an even bigger crowd, but that
> doesn't mean Fischer is an admirable person.
Surely Tim Hanke could spare ONE comment that is not a personal comparison
with Fischer or Hitler? What about the /behavior/ of the person in question,
in the realm of developing chess?
This subject, as I do not tire of mentioning, has nothing to do with USCF -
even though that is why USCF ostensibly exists - to promote chess to the
greater culture in the USA. If there were ever need of any proof that this
is the case, you have just read it here.
I wonder that Tim didn't say that Hitler got bigger crowds at his rallies
than some woman GM on her own nickel has independently developed.
quote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I, too, hope the readers here will take my comments for what they are
> worth.
Me too. Is membership still critical at USCF? Are those lately-departed
readers taking USCF for what its worth?
Maybe its just bad luck for the 27th year?
Phil Innes
quote:
> Tim Hanke
>
>
>
| |
|
| "Tim Hanke" wrote in message news:6sCdnSFtAdsdh5DfRVn-qw@comcast.com...
quote:
> If all you care about are results, narrowly defined, I wish you well. They
> say Hitler had great results at reviving the German economy, too, but that
> doesn't make him a good person.
Tim, you made a very unfortunate comparison. Hitler took 90 billion deutsche
mark credits and made German economy going on a war.
Regards,
Jerzy
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-12, 2:07 pm |
|
Joel wrote:
quote:
> You know, Tim, I hadn't bothered responding to the BarbaraVilliers
message
quote:
> because I assumed that people would naturally dismiss an angry rant
from a
quote:
> disgruntled former staff member for what it is. However, you have
never
quote:
> been a friend of Chess Live and obviously couldn't resist a change to
take
quote:
> another poke in our direction.
>
> To set the record straight, Truong & Polgar have done more for our
> competitors, playchess.com, ICC, and WCN, than they have ever done
for us.
quote:
> Frankly I wish they would get more involved because I've seen them
both do a
quote:
> great deal for chess. Remember all the naysayers when Paul Truong
was
quote:
> trying to organize the U.S. Women's Olympiad Team? Well look at the
> results!
>
> And GM Susan Polgar? She would be well admired by chess players
> everywhere--and especially women--if all she ever did was play chess,
but
quote:
> she has also worked very hard lately to promote the development of
our next
quote:
> generation of chess players. As the most family-friendy of the
Internet
quote:
> chess servers (thanks in no small part to the demands of our original
quote:
> partners at the USCF), Chess Live would strongly welcome Susan
Polgar's
quote:
> increased participation. She's done just a single lecture for us in
the
quote:
> last six months, but that lecture attracted the largest crowd we
experienced
quote:
> during that entire period.
>
> Make rude comments if you want, but I hope the readers here will take
your
quote:
> comments for what they're worth.
>
> Joel
> "And GM Susan Polgar? She would be well admired by chess players
> everywhere--and especially women--"
I don't admire Susan Polgar. She is stuffed with pomposity. Does
nothing but self promote on Chess-Live and I as a woman neither respect
or admire her. I prefer by far her far more talented Sister Judit who I
genuinely like. Anyone who has to tyranise the users and hold
chess-live to ransom with unkept promises does not get my vote of
confidence.
BarbaraVilliers
Louise[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> "Tim Hanke" <timothyhanke@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:zbidnbmpQsofbJHfRVn-ug@comcast.com...
message[vbcol=seagreen]
of[vbcol=seagreen]
Arclight[vbcol=seagreen]
ManOfStyle[vbcol=seagreen]
Lots[vbcol=seagreen]
where[vbcol=seagreen]
am[vbcol=seagreen]
mindless[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
about[vbcol=seagreen]
| |
| OrangeJuice 2005-02-12, 2:07 pm |
| Dear Mr. Berez,
As the owner of US Chess Live, can you please answer this question?
Why in the hell would you name Paul Truong, someone who has frequently
been labeled as an abuser and computer cheater on chess.net,
chessclub.com and even your own site (US Chess Live) to any position of
authority? No wonder I quit and joined playchess.com.
Your site is an absolute embarassment and should be shut down. I rarely
agree with the management of the us chess federation, but I agree 100%
with their decision to terminate their contract with US Chess Live. I
hope they do a deal with the playchess.com to bring quick rated matches
to playchess.com, so they are ruined by cheaters like they are on your
site.
Joel wrote:
quote:
> You know, Tim, I hadn't bothered responding to the BarbaraVilliers
message
quote:
> because I assumed that people would naturally dismiss an angry rant
from a
quote:
> disgruntled former staff member for what it is. However, you have
never
quote:
> been a friend of Chess Live and obviously couldn't resist a change to
take
quote:
> another poke in our direction.
>
> To set the record straight, Truong & Polgar have done more for our
> competitors, playchess.com, ICC, and WCN, than they have ever done
for us.
quote:
> Frankly I wish they would get more involved because I've seen them
both do a
quote:
> great deal for chess. Remember all the naysayers when Paul Truong
was
quote:
> trying to organize the U.S. Women's Olympiad Team? Well look at the
> results!
>
> And GM Susan Polgar? She would be well admired by chess players
> everywhere--and especially women--if all she ever did was play chess,
but
quote:
> she has also worked very hard lately to promote the development of
our next
quote:
> generation of chess players. As the most family-friendy of the
Internet
quote:
> chess servers (thanks in no small part to the demands of our original
quote:
> partners at the USCF), Chess Live would strongly welcome Susan
Polgar's
quote:
> increased participation. She's done just a single lecture for us in
the
quote:
> last six months, but that lecture attracted the largest crowd we
experienced
quote:
> during that entire period.
>
> Make rude comments if you want, but I hope the readers here will take
your[vbcol=seagreen]
> comments for what they're worth.
>
> Joel
>
> "Tim Hanke" <timothyhanke@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:zbidnbmpQsofbJHfRVn-ug@comcast.com...
message[vbcol=seagreen]
of[vbcol=seagreen]
Arclight[vbcol=seagreen]
ManOfStyle[vbcol=seagreen]
Lots[vbcol=seagreen]
where[vbcol=seagreen]
am[vbcol=seagreen]
mindless[vbcol=seagreen]
and[vbcol=seagreen]
about[vbcol=seagreen]
| |
| OrangeJuice 2005-02-12, 2:07 pm |
| so they aren't*
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-12, 2:07 pm |
| Dear Barbara Villiers
quote:
[vbcol=seagreen]
> I don't admire Susan Polgar. She is stuffed with pomposity. Does
> nothing but self promote on Chess-Live and I as a woman neither respect
> or admire her. I prefer by far her far more talented Sister Judit who I
> genuinely like. Anyone who has to tyranise the users and hold
> chess-live to ransom with unkept promises does not get my vote of
> confidence.
> BarbaraVilliers
> Louise
I was genuinely interested in your message, even though I say up-front, I
have another perspective.
Can you say for us what Susan Polgar has done that disadvantages chess?
[Even though she does it through her own part in it]
Because I am not familiar with Chess-Live, I also do not understand your
term 'tyrannize or what promises were held out and not followed through
upon.
I am writing because I do not want to wash away your comments with more
questions, but because I want to understand what your experience was. Is it
because [for example] that a GM player overrides comments of non-GM players
like yourself? Or are these tyranies related to something to do with
organization of chess?
Because you say you like Judit, is this something to do with the development
of women's chess, as compared to women-in-chess.
My other perspective is to work with professional players in developing the
game, and I welcome all criticisms of them! It can only do good, but first,
I must understand better what it is that oppresses you.
Will you please help me understand your critique?
Cordially, Phil Innes
| |
|
|
"OrangeJuice" <floridaorange2005@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1108162009.762639.220770@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Dear Mr. Berez,
> As the owner of US Chess Live, can you please answer this question?
> Why in the hell would you name Paul Truong, someone who has frequently
> been labeled as an abuser and computer cheater on chess.net,
> chessclub.com and even your own site (US Chess Live) to any position of
> authority?
In chess, the end justifies the means.
| |
|
| Chess One wrote (to Tim Hanke):
quote:
> "Tim Hanke" <timothyhanke@comcast.net> wrote in
> message news:6sCdnSFtAdsdh5DfRVn-qw@comcast.com...
When he was organising the US women's team at the 2004 Chess Olympiad,
what was Paul Truong *expected* (by Tim Hanke or anyone else) to
accomplish *beyond* such 'results, narrowly defined' (to quote Tim
Hanke) as winning an Olympiad silver medal *for the first time*?
Was Paul Truong supposed to have made chess the most popular game
among boys and girls across the United States?
[vbcol=seagreen]
The people who say that tend *not* to understand the deeper historical
context (which would require too much time to explain here).
[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Here it is. The first ever medal for a US woman's team,
Congratulations to that team for its historic achievement.
quote:
> and all Tim Hanke can do is make an immediate comparison with
> Adolf Hitler, based on some comparison of efficiencies to achieve
> a task, and no other comment!!
Perhaps Tim Hanke's comparison of Paul Truong and Adolf Hitler
shows the true spirit of generosity that has made American chess
and the USCF great (sarcasm intended).
quote:
> That's USCF board level talk. No partners, no sponsors, no
> public plans arrayed before a 'membership organisation', and
> in fact, very few friends of any stripe who could be said to
> be disinterested in their own fortunes.
>
>
> Surely Tim Hanke could spare ONE comment that is not a personal
> comparison with Fischer or Hitler? What about the /behavior/ of
> the person in question, in the realm of developing chess?
One wonders to whom Tim Hanke would compare Jerome Bibuld,
a longtime chess organiser, tournament director, and international
arbiter (who has worked to promote chess in Africa).
By the way, I have criticised Paul Truong (who seemed, as
some other writers here also had concluded, to have been
writing disingenuously under the pseudonym of 'Bob Bennett')
when he apparently was acting inappropriately. But it seems
to me that Tim Hanke has been churlish in apparently attempting
to deny Paul Truong a share of the credit for the US women's
team's silver medal at the 2004 Olympiad.
--Nick
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-12, 2:07 pm |
| Phil
you make an interesting point. My admiration for Judit Polgar is
because she doesn't take prisoners. Judit goes out and doesn't bother
with womens chess. I think advancement of chess should be for all
players. Personally I dislike female only chess as I have seen that it
denigrates women. I think in order to improve the women MUSt compete in
an open field against men. I have and never will play in womens chess
events. Susan Polgar objected to my profile due to the views I put
about womens chess.
Your point about GM players. I have met the great David Bronstein in
person.He was kind enough to carefully show me his game and demonstrate
the finer nuances of his analysis. He treated me as a fellow chess
player.As does GM James Plaskett. Many GMs are like David and Jim but
occasionally you meet a Susan Polgar who decides that everyone must
jump to her orders. GMs are not infallible. They are humans and cannot
expect respect unless they earn it by sharing their knowledge and being
courteous and helpful. I have yet to see Susan demonstrate this on
Chess-Live I'm sorry to say.
Paul Truong and Susan Polgar have left a trail of broken promises to
help the Chess-Live server sand I am very sad to se Joel Berez being
constantly let down by them. This is very bad for the staff when things
are not followed through. They promised many new members from The
Polgar Centre but we waited a year for this to materialise. I also
think that rudeness to the staff on grounds of Susan is a GM is crass
and uncalled for.
I am on a League Comittee in the Uk and we are busy trying to promote
the site but our efforts were thwarted by constant changes in higher
management and the whims of Paul and Susan.
Chess-Live has the greates interface, 95% of the people are okay but
then you get a few bad apples spoiling it for everyone.Iworked as Head
Of Support and the amount of bans being filtered through was
horrifying. Users got banned on highly dubious grounds and I was
worried about the trend. Amsterdoom was the person doing these bans,
partially when asked to do so y Paul and Susan.
Sorry for the lengthy post.
Louise
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-12, 2:07 pm |
|
"BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108216939.044312.249380@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Phil
> you make an interesting point. My admiration for Judit Polgar is
> because she doesn't take prisoners. Judit goes out and doesn't bother
> with womens chess. I think advancement of chess should be for all
> players. Personally I dislike female only chess as I have seen that it
> denigrates women. I think in order to improve the women MUSt compete in
> an open field against men. I have and never will play in womens chess
> events. Susan Polgar objected to my profile due to the views I put
> about womens chess.
Dear Louise, your perceptive points in this note are worth deeper
consideration and I will attend to that before responding further. Thank
you. Cordially, Phil
quote:
> Your point about GM players. I have met the great David Bronstein in
> person.He was kind enough to carefully show me his game and demonstrate
> the finer nuances of his analysis. He treated me as a fellow chess
> player.As does GM James Plaskett. Many GMs are like David and Jim but
> occasionally you meet a Susan Polgar who decides that everyone must
> jump to her orders. GMs are not infallible. They are humans and cannot
> expect respect unless they earn it by sharing their knowledge and being
> courteous and helpful. I have yet to see Susan demonstrate this on
> Chess-Live I'm sorry to say.
> Paul Truong and Susan Polgar have left a trail of broken promises to
> help the Chess-Live server sand I am very sad to se Joel Berez being
> constantly let down by them. This is very bad for the staff when things
> are not followed through. They promised many new members from The
> Polgar Centre but we waited a year for this to materialise. I also
> think that rudeness to the staff on grounds of Susan is a GM is crass
> and uncalled for.
> I am on a League Comittee in the Uk and we are busy trying to promote
> the site but our efforts were thwarted by constant changes in higher
> management and the whims of Paul and Susan.
> Chess-Live has the greates interface, 95% of the people are okay but
> then you get a few bad apples spoiling it for everyone.Iworked as Head
> Of Support and the amount of bans being filtered through was
> horrifying. Users got banned on highly dubious grounds and I was
> worried about the trend. Amsterdoom was the person doing these bans,
> partially when asked to do so y Paul and Susan.
> Sorry for the lengthy post.
> Louise
>
| |
| pawnstormCA 2005-02-12, 2:07 pm |
| > She's done just a single lecture for us in the last six months,
quote:
> but that lecture attracted the largest crowd we experienced
> during that entire period.
Interesting. How many watched that lecture? 1,000?
| |
| GreenCastle 2005-02-13, 11:50 am |
| pawnstormCA wrote:
quote:
>
> Interesting. How many watched that lecture? 1,000?
Here's a question:
Do we even know that it was Susan giving the lecture, and not Paul?
| |
| Ray Gordon 2005-02-13, 11:50 am |
| >> She's done just a single lecture for us in the last six months,
quote:
>
> Interesting. How many watched that lecture? 1,000?
In other words, about 2/3 the number of people who watch the two top
one-minute players on ICC when they cross paths.
--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/easy.html
Seduction Made Easy. Get this book FREE when you buy participating
affiliated books!
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
The Seduction Library. Four free books to get you started on your quest to
get laid.
Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
| |
| Louise 2005-02-13, 11:50 am |
| "GreenCastle" <greencastle2004@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<1108275054.038782.27140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>...
quote:
> pawnstormCA wrote:
>
> Here's a question:
>
> Do we even know that it was Susan giving the lecture, and not Paul?
Here is Susan using the Handle Chesstactics moaning that people were
not attentive enough to her self promotion (or was it Paul).
Sure Susan claims to do a lot for chess but how much money is she
making for it? We all deserve to make a living, please don't mistake
me. But I hear that this professional player is meticulous in
extracting every last dollar and then if she speaks we are supposed to
regard it as an honour.
I prefer David Bronstein who was so kind as to show me his chess and
didn't charge me a penny.James Plaskett very kindly did our League a
simul at a very cheap price.These guys clearly have a different
attitude towards helping players and promoting chess. Susan is more
akin to developing a chess Factory churning forth the Polgar name (to
which Judit is by far the most admired and respected for her position
as around 10 in the world and not just the confines of womens chess )
and no doubt costing the people a pretty penny somewhere along the
line. So please lets not be hypocrital about her generosity lol
BarbaraVilliers
ChessTactics(*): When I came on ICC, they had 450 watching Garry's
game. It went up to 1450 immediately. They asked thousands of
questions. I came on here and after 45 minutes, no even one member
noticed.
ChessTactics(*): I have people asking if I am a fake
ChessTactics(*): Such a different mentality
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM)(CA): lol it's been so long since we've had a
non-money-whore GM here (as opposed to Wojo) that the players are
likely in disbelief lol
ChessTactics(*): lol
BarbaraVilliers(*): we had GM on the other day
BarbaraVilliers(*): Turov I think
ChessTactics(*): hmm. I don't teach online or make money online. Is
that a bad thing?
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM)(CA): Alexander Vodkawicz
ChessTactics(*): 
ChessTactics(*): Good name
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): ;-)
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): I was at the tourney in Oak Brook a week or so
ago and was looking at the crosstable, and sudenly I smelled 'the by
products of alcohol' behind me. I figured 'Wojo', I looked back and
sure enuf, Wojo was looking over my shoulder at the chart
Aurora(*): :-D
ChessTactics(*): He is a brilliant player
ChessTactics(*): but that is just too bad
ChessTactics(*): Him and Ehlvest
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): yes I found that out OTB a few years ago, lol
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): as for player disbelief... we got fooled by an
apparent fake IM Mark Orr a few months ago... not sure how many fans
knew he was fake. But maybe if you add the (GM) tag to the name
they'll wake up. I think they are pretty sure we wouldn't allow its
use on a fake
ChessTactics(*): I think Paul caught him immediately, right?
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): yes Paul sniffed it quite early
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): I was not as sure, since he seemed to be
talking in chat about things I figured the real Mark Orr would say...
it was the most elaborate hoax Ive ever seen online
Aurora(*): The real Mark Orr has had this happen to him before
Aurora(*): he thinks he knows who is doing it
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): on the other hand... I DID report him to
aomputerabuse the first time i saw his games, on day one, because the
move times were suspicious...
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): computerabuse
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): But I figured maybe he was an IM progging,
because I was sure we wouldn't allow an IM tag without absolute
confirmation ;-)
BarbaraVilliers(*): I talked to the real Mark Orr on the phone
ChessTactics(*): Who gave him the IM tag without checking?
ChessTactics(*): I thought we have a policy of checking this?
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): djud did, but I bet he has learned his lesson,
lol
ChessTactics(*): Do we have a policy now?
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): we have the same policy - to confirm them
before acting. djud just failed to follow it, he trusted an online
stranger... that was a mental error
ChessTactics(*): I see
ChessTactics(*): OK, thanks
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): it was a fairly elaborate ruse, as far as
online ruses go. Signs of cheating, and bantering with teens... other
than that, a pretty good fake
JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): brb
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-13, 11:50 am |
|
"BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108216939.044312.249380@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Phil
> you make an interesting point. My admiration for Judit Polgar is
> because she doesn't take prisoners. Judit goes out and doesn't bother
> with womens chess. I think advancement of chess should be for all
> players. Personally I dislike female only chess as I have seen that it
> denigrates women.
Some years ago I interviewed the top UK women's player Susan Lalic [as she
was then] and posed the same question. I was surprised that she did not
agree with me, and made instead a case for women's chess. Since that time I
have included interview questions on this subject, and the responses are
various.
I am noting, in passing, that there are several points of view, and those
women who state there should be women's chess have not said they feel
denigrated by it.
Whatever men may express on this subject is secondary -- and I therefore
relegate my own opinion on this subject to your experiences.
Can you say how you personally feel denigrated by other women who play in
women-only competitions?
Historically there is ample precedent in almost any realm for a seperate
development path -- since male-dominated activiites would otherwise not even
notice a woman participant <right?> and the suffragetes did not gain women
the vote by saying 'pretty-please'.
However, there comes a time when unification is possible, and one route for
this conversation is to discuss if (a) that time is now, or (b) there is
independent merit for a seperate realm for women in chess. <you agree that
these are the 2 available options for a discussion?>
quote:
> I think in order to improve the women MUSt compete in
> an open field against men. I have and never will play in womens chess
> events. Susan Polgar objected to my profile due to the views I put
> about womens chess.
I am less interested in the singular views and instances here, than in the
broader subject above. But I would say that, as I understand the issue from
reading here, that you were both employees of the same business entity, and
it is the publisher who must speak to this issue. In other words, does the
publisher allow both points of view to exist on his broadcast media? In
terms of responsibility, the publisher's desk is where the buck stops.
A more direct inquiry is what the publisher established as policy before the
conflict, and what he has since said about it.
quote:
> Your point about GM players. I have met the great David Bronstein in
> person.He was kind enough to carefully show me his game and demonstrate
> the finer nuances of his analysis. He treated me as a fellow chess
> player.As does GM James Plaskett. Many GMs are like David and Jim but
> occasionally you meet a Susan Polgar who decides that everyone must
> jump to her orders. GMs are not infallible. They are humans and cannot
> expect respect unless they earn it by sharing their knowledge and being
> courteous and helpful.
Of course -- GMs are entirely fallible human beings, and often contain
multitudes! Their opinions are not necessarily congenial to our subject -
Fischer, eg, was remarkably generous in sharing all sorts of information
about the game to anyone who would listen to him - even remembering games
played in simuls 6 months before - but did not have a high opinion of
women's ability to play at the top levels. While being generous he was also
wrong! But was he wrong from an anti-woman perspective, or was it because he
saw no signs during his time of women being able to attain 2600+ ratings?
quote:
> I have yet to see Susan demonstrate this on
> Chess-Live I'm sorry to say.
> Paul Truong and Susan Polgar have left a trail of broken promises to
> help the Chess-Live server sand I am very sad to se Joel Berez being
> constantly let down by them. This is very bad for the staff when things
> are not followed through. They promised many new members from The
> Polgar Centre but we waited a year for this to materialise. I also
> think that rudeness to the staff on grounds of Susan is a GM is crass
> and uncalled for.
> I am on a League Comittee in the Uk and we are busy trying to promote
> the site but our efforts were thwarted by constant changes in higher
> management and the whims of Paul and Susan.
I think that the management needs to address these issues. I thank you for
sharing all these perspectives, and apologise for not being able to engage
them all to the degree that you might wish [I think other parties should
more properly do so], but do the think the top section of this message, of
women-in-chess, warrants more general discussion -- and is a fit subject for
this public newsgroup.
Thanks again for raising this topic by citing a current difficulty, but
which in my opinion has to do with all players, and is really so much larger
than interactions among a few personalties.
Cordially, Phil Innes
quote:
> Chess-Live has the greates interface, 95% of the people are okay but
> then you get a few bad apples spoiling it for everyone.Iworked as Head
> Of Support and the amount of bans being filtered through was
> horrifying. Users got banned on highly dubious grounds and I was
> worried about the trend. Amsterdoom was the person doing these bans,
> partially when asked to do so y Paul and Susan.
> Sorry for the lengthy post.
> Louise
>
| |
| pawnstormCA 2005-02-13, 11:50 am |
| Ray,
I was asking how many people were watching it. I have no idea. I've
since talked to someone that used to be a helper on US Chess Live, and
they said that the server has never had on more than 500 people logged
in. He said they peak at under 300 people most days.
So I suspect the number who watched her lecture was between 100 and
200, which is less than most average GM games on chessclub.com.
Roger
| |
| GreenCastle 2005-02-13, 11:50 am |
| pawnstormCA wrote:
quote:
> Ray,
>
> I was asking how many people were watching it. I have no idea. I've
> since talked to someone that used to be a helper on US Chess Live,
and
quote:
> they said that the server has never had on more than 500 people
logged
quote:
> in. He said they peak at under 300 people most days.
>
> So I suspect the number who watched her lecture was between 100 and
> 200, which is less than most average GM games on chessclub.com.
>
> Roger
Based on my second log (see post 6) it can be shown that Paul Truong is
known to log on Susan's handle and use the Polgar name to forward his
own agenda (in this case, attempting to intimidate me into leaving the
server).
I'm not so sure anymore that it was really Susan giving the lecture.
And I don't see why other people in this thread are still assuming
that.
And CRud: In thanks for BV's praise of me (!?) I would like to endorse
her message. I realize that her style of writing may appear to be a
rant to you, but I can assure you that the corruption she is
complaining about is very real.
| |
| Randy Bauer 2005-02-13, 5:48 pm |
|
"Louise" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d6f6b168.0502130337.533c6854@posting.google.com...
quote:
> "GreenCastle" <greencastle2004@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<1108275054.038782.27140@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>...
> Here is Susan using the Handle Chesstactics moaning that people were
> not attentive enough to her self promotion (or was it Paul).
I read the exchange below, and I don't read anything that casts Susan in a
particularly bad light. Reads like normal conversation to me.
Further, I'm a little put off by your posting these logs; I doubt that Susan
(and perhaps the others in the conversation) are thrilled to see the
discussion of others posted on this public newsgroup. I assume the
conversation wasn't in an open channel but one limited only to
administrators and staff? Don't they have some expectation that those
conversations are limited to those who participated in them?
quote:
> Sure Susan claims to do a lot for chess but how much money is she
> making for it? We all deserve to make a living, please don't mistake
> me. But I hear that this professional player is meticulous in
> extracting every last dollar and then if she speaks we are supposed to
> regard it as an honour.
I say more power to any titled player who can make a decent living off
chess! Susan has worked hard to get where she is, she has put U.S. women's
chess back on the map with the performance in the last Olympiad -- what's
the beef?
quote:
> I prefer David Bronstein who was so kind as to show me his chess and
> didn't charge me a penny.James Plaskett very kindly did our League a
> simul at a very cheap price.These guys clearly have a different
> attitude towards helping players and promoting chess. Susan is more
> akin to developing a chess Factory churning forth the Polgar name (to
> which Judit is by far the most admired and respected for her position
> as around 10 in the world and not just the confines of womens chess )
> and no doubt costing the people a pretty penny somewhere along the
> line. So please lets not be hypocrital about her generosity lol
> BarbaraVilliers
All three Polgar sisters will be appearing jointly at a tournament in the
U.S. in a few weeks; I doubt that the appeal of the Polgar name is
exclusively because of Judit. Susan has been a world champion and
(deservedly) has the men's GM title as well. The women who have earned that
title don't have to take a backseat to anybody.
Randy Bauer
quote:
> ChessTactics(*): When I came on ICC, they had 450 watching Garry's
> game. It went up to 1450 immediately. They asked thousands of
> questions. I came on here and after 45 minutes, no even one member
> noticed.
> ChessTactics(*): I have people asking if I am a fake
> ChessTactics(*): Such a different mentality
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM)(CA): lol it's been so long since we've had a
> non-money-whore GM here (as opposed to Wojo) that the players are
> likely in disbelief lol
> ChessTactics(*): lol
> BarbaraVilliers(*): we had GM on the other day
> BarbaraVilliers(*): Turov I think
> ChessTactics(*): hmm. I don't teach online or make money online. Is
> that a bad thing?
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM)(CA): Alexander Vodkawicz
> ChessTactics(*): 
> ChessTactics(*): Good name
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): ;-)
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): I was at the tourney in Oak Brook a week or so
> ago and was looking at the crosstable, and sudenly I smelled 'the by
> products of alcohol' behind me. I figured 'Wojo', I looked back and
> sure enuf, Wojo was looking over my shoulder at the chart
> Aurora(*): :-D
> ChessTactics(*): He is a brilliant player
> ChessTactics(*): but that is just too bad
> ChessTactics(*): Him and Ehlvest
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): yes I found that out OTB a few years ago, lol
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): as for player disbelief... we got fooled by an
> apparent fake IM Mark Orr a few months ago... not sure how many fans
> knew he was fake. But maybe if you add the (GM) tag to the name
> they'll wake up. I think they are pretty sure we wouldn't allow its
> use on a fake
> ChessTactics(*): I think Paul caught him immediately, right?
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): yes Paul sniffed it quite early
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): I was not as sure, since he seemed to be
> talking in chat about things I figured the real Mark Orr would say...
> it was the most elaborate hoax Ive ever seen online
> Aurora(*): The real Mark Orr has had this happen to him before
> Aurora(*): he thinks he knows who is doing it
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): on the other hand... I DID report him to
> aomputerabuse the first time i saw his games, on day one, because the
> move times were suspicious...
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): computerabuse
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): But I figured maybe he was an IM progging,
> because I was sure we wouldn't allow an IM tag without absolute
> confirmation ;-)
> BarbaraVilliers(*): I talked to the real Mark Orr on the phone
> ChessTactics(*): Who gave him the IM tag without checking?
> ChessTactics(*): I thought we have a policy of checking this?
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): djud did, but I bet he has learned his lesson,
> lol
> ChessTactics(*): Do we have a policy now?
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): we have the same policy - to confirm them
> before acting. djud just failed to follow it, he trusted an online
> stranger... that was a mental error
> ChessTactics(*): I see
> ChessTactics(*): OK, thanks
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): it was a fairly elaborate ruse, as far as
> online ruses go. Signs of cheating, and bantering with teens... other
> than that, a pretty good fake
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM): brb
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-14, 5:50 pm |
| " am noting, in passing, that there are several points of view, and
those
women who state there should be women's chess have not said they feel
denigrated by it.
Whatever men may express on this subject is secondary -- and I
therefore
relegate my own opinion on this subject to your experiences.
Can you say how you personally feel denigrated by other women who play
in "
women-only competitions?
Phil
The problem with women only chess is that those women who refuse to
compete get pressurised by people (often men for refusing to to opt
out). I have suffered several experiences of this. I once had a male
match captain slam the telephone down on me when I courteously refused
a womens board. My own League tried to force me into playing in the
4NCL where they have a womens board. Once again I refused.
Obviously women who enjoy female only events do not feel denigrated by
it. But I would never desire a female title as to me that is the
consolation prize for the girls who cannot compete with the big
boys.Some women do feel disgusted by the sexist treatment they receive.
Often being dumped on the lowest board in a match and subjected to
stupid comments at tourneys such "as are you here to watch"
One guy resigned a blitz game without making a move. When I questioned
him he answered he had done this as because I was female I had no
chance of winning without the concession. Needless to say I slapped the
clock played the game and wiped him out.
I really admire Judit Polgar as she has taken a path that has led her
to the top of chess and its my belief that this is partly to do with
her indifference to female chess.But I would say that, as I understand
the issue from
reading here, that you were both employees of the same business entity,
and
it is the publisher who must speak to this issue. In other words, does
the
publisher allow both points of view to exist on his broadcast media? In
terms of responsibility, the publisher's desk is where the buck stops.
At the time I wrote my profile Joel Berez had no objections to my
views. I don't think he ever had a problem with the opposing views
until Susan Polgar complained that I was unsupportive of her aims. I
never was attempting to directly attack her and when I joined the
server she was inactive and I knew little of her except that she was
sister of Judit.
Historically there is ample precedent in almost any realm for a
seperate
development path -- since male-dominated activiites would otherwise not
even
notice a woman participant <right?> and the suffragetes did not gain
women
the vote by saying 'pretty-please'.
Interesting point but why is a separate path needed for women who play
chess?. Are we feeble delicate creatures unable to compete against the
rampant masculinity at the chessboard lol.
Interestingly I met my husband at a chess club and he says I am a
stronger player then he is.His view is that my chess playing has been
disrupted by idiotic chess politics and men who dislike women playing
chess.
You raise an interesting topic though and I will suggest to my husband
that he opens a new thread on wonen in chess
BarbaraVilliers
| |
| Ray Gordon 2005-02-14, 5:50 pm |
| > I was asking how many people were watching it. I have no idea. I've
quote:
> since talked to someone that used to be a helper on US Chess Live, and
> they said that the server has never had on more than 500 people logged
> in. He said they peak at under 300 people most days.
>
> So I suspect the number who watched her lecture was between 100 and
> 200, which is less than most average GM games on chessclub.com.
Heck, I've seen laggers and latestarters in the Flash tournaments there get
more of an audience as they delay the next round, though I wouldn't call
them "fans"
--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/easy.html
Seduction Made Easy. Get this book FREE when you buy participating
affiliated books!
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
The Seduction Library. Four free books to get you started on your quest to
get laid.
Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
| |
| Ray Gordon 2005-02-14, 5:50 pm |
| >
quote:
> Based on my second log (see post 6) it can be shown that Paul Truong is
> known to log on Susan's handle and use the Polgar name to forward his
> own agenda (in this case, attempting to intimidate me into leaving the
> server).
> I'm not so sure anymore that it was really Susan giving the lecture.
Well the one way to resolve this would be to have it done by webcam.
--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/easy.html
Seduction Made Easy. Get this book FREE when you buy participating
affiliated books!
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
The Seduction Library. Four free books to get you started on your quest to
get laid.
Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
| |
| Ray Gordon 2005-02-14, 5:50 pm |
| > ChessTactics(*): I have people asking if I am a fake
quote:
> ChessTactics(*): Such a different mentality
> JohnnyCheckmate(*)(NM)(CA): lol it's been so long since we've had a
> non-money-whore GM here (as opposed to Wojo) that the players are
Huh?
ICC is LOADED with GMs who play all the time, and who even enter the
tournaments against us "commoners." Talion and Smallville are two examples
of this.
| |
| Ray Gordon 2005-02-14, 5:50 pm |
| > Can you say how you personally feel denigrated by other women who play in
quote:
> women-only competitions?
It's a slap in the face of what chess stands for: intellectual merit.
I'm as offended by women's chess as I would be by the introduction of dice
into the game to help determine the moves.
--
Ray Gordon, Author
http://www.cybersheet.com/easy.html
Seduction Made Easy. Get this book FREE when you buy participating
affiliated books!
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
The Seduction Library. Four free books to get you started on your quest to
get laid.
Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech forum.
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-14, 5:50 pm |
| ray
Frankly I couldn't have put it better myself. I guess I just don't
appreciate my intellectual merit being questioned with dumb down chess.
BarbaraVilliers
| |
| Ray Gordon 2005-02-14, 9:48 pm |
| > ray
quote:
> Frankly I couldn't have put it better myself.
Thanks!
It sounded better than "I really think it's lame for women with my rating to
have the WIM title."
quote:
>I guess I just don't
> appreciate my intellectual merit being questioned with dumb down chess.
> BarbaraVilliers
>
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-14, 9:48 pm |
| > Can you say how you personally feel denigrated by other women who play
quote:
> in women-only competitions?
> Phil
quote:
> The problem with women only chess is that those women who refuse to
> compete get pressurised by people (often men for refusing to to opt
> out). I have suffered several experiences of this. I once had a male
> match captain slam the telephone down on me when I courteously refused
> a womens board. My own League tried to force me into playing in the
> 4NCL where they have a womens board. Once again I refused.
> Obviously women who enjoy female only events do not feel denigrated by
> it. But I would never desire a female title as to me that is the
> consolation prize for the girls who cannot compete with the big
> boys.Some women do feel disgusted by the sexist treatment they receive.
From other private correspondence I do not doubt it, and your examples are
by no means the worst affronts to women I have read.
quote:
> Often being dumped on the lowest board in a match and subjected to
> stupid comments at tourneys such "as are you here to watch"
> One guy resigned a blitz game without making a move. When I questioned
> him he answered he had done this as because I was female I had no
> chance of winning without the concession. Needless to say I slapped the
> clock played the game and wiped him out.
> I really admire Judit Polgar as she has taken a path that has led her
> to the top of chess and its my belief that this is partly to do with
> her indifference to female chess
I understand your point of view. But this was not my question. If this is
your certain feeling, why feel demeaned by women who play in women-only
chess?
For myself, I am arranging a few matches with all GMs, 2 men, 1 woman, and 1
junior. Should I exclude the junior player? People think he is very
interesting and a great prospect - maybe even a future world champion.
Strictly on ELOs I could invite a stronger player, but not serve the same
consitituency of interest, teenagers.
The same is true of the woman player - should her ELO not be strong enough
should I deny that she could play? In which case many women will not see,
nor be encouraged by a female chess player, and they will see 4 guys playing
four other guys.
quote:
> In terms of responsibility, the publisher's desk is where the buck stops.
quote:
> At the time I wrote my profile Joel Berez had no objections to my
> views. I don't think he ever had a problem with the opposing views
> until Susan Polgar complained that I was unsupportive of her aims. I
> never was attempting to directly attack her and when I joined the
> server she was inactive and I knew little of her except that she was
> sister of Judit.
Whatever the influences on the publisher, it is still his business decision
[legally too]. I am not offering to arbitrate the issue, since here we have
just one side of the issue from public writing and I can't represent or
consider here what has not been made public.
But it seems to me that in reading of these affairs, you said to participant
of USCL that you did not like women playing in women's chess, and women
should play chess without any props or supports or separateness, and you
insisted on this point of view [which seems to me honorably held by
yourself], but the publisher did not agree with you that this was the only
view possible, and, the result was that you would not compromise, and were
fired. Is that it?
quote:
> Historically there is ample precedent in almost any realm for a
> seperate
> development path -- since male-dominated activiites would otherwise not
> even
> notice a woman participant <right?> and the suffragetes did not gain
> women
> the vote by saying 'pretty-please'.
quote:
> Interesting point but why is a separate path needed for women who play
> chess?. Are we feeble delicate creatures unable to compete against the
> rampant masculinity at the chessboard lol.
Yes. You have babies. You have to play chess when you have your period. You
are the primary care-takers of children in our society.
It is not the same for men. You are less likely to find sponsorships because
of a less predictable performance level over time. This is not a statement
of who is better in actual or in potential terms of chess playing-skill, but
in terms of the real sociological impact of what is usually entailed in
being female in our culture.
quote:
> Interestingly I met my husband at a chess club and he says I am a
> stronger player then he is.His view is that my chess playing has been
> disrupted by idiotic chess politics and men who dislike women playing
> chess.
It is a truism: Chess politics makes even the Great Ones appear like
squabbling petty children. The only way to stay sane in chess politics is to
defer your own views, and attempt actual representation of players. It is an
interesting idea, never tried out in practice with any conviction.
quote:
> You raise an interesting topic though and I will suggest to my husband
> that he opens a new thread on wonen in chess.
> BarbaraVilliers
Cordially, Phil
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-15, 6:49 am |
|
Can you say how you personally feel denigrated by other women who play
in "
women-only competitions
Yes indeed I do feel denigrated as I think players should play on equal
terms and I dislike the idea of being viewed as a female chess player
rather then a chess player. . I dislike segregation. I used to be
Secretary of a Chess Club and we didn't have women or junior policy.
Just chess for all. The recipe worked.
"For myself, I am arranging a few matches with all GMs, 2 men, 1 woman,
and 1
junior. Should I exclude the junior player? People think he is very
interesting and a great prospect - maybe even a future world champion.
Strictly on ELOs I could invite a stronger player, but not serve the
same
consitituency of interest, teenagers.The same is true of the woman
player - should her ELO not be strong enough
should I deny that she could play? In which case many women will not
see,
nor be encouraged by a female chess player, and they will see 4 guys
playing
four other guys.
"
I thought we were playing chess. Not representing certain groups. If
the female player's ELO is not strong enough she should not be
included. What makes you think that a woman needs female company to
play chess?
"But it seems to me that in reading of these affairs, you said to
participant
of USCL that you did not like women playing in women's chess, and women
should play chess without any props or supports or separateness, and
you
insisted on this point of view [which seems to me honorably held by
yourself], but the publisher did not agree with you that this was the
only
view possible, and, the result was that you would not compromise, and
were
fired. Is that it? "
I was not fired because of my profile. I had been fired as a Senior
Admin at the behest of Truong and Polgar over a week befor the noteban.
I had agreed to stay at chess-live and help out behind the scenes with
non staff status. I was happy to do this. However Truong and Polgar
were not happy and had my profile notebanned and myself muted for
mentioning that they had done this.I hasten to add that until I was
fired my finger was immaculate without ever receiving a sanction.
"Yes. You have babies. You have to play chess when you have your
period. You
are the primary care-takers of children in our society."
Yes I have periods. They are not a disease and strangely enough they
improve my play they do not adversly affect it. Periods are not a
handicap but a natural occurrence.Women are not always wrapped up in
child care. I run a businness. My husband works long hours. Shouldn't
he be considered as vulnerable from exhaustion of a long days work when
he plays chess!!! and how about the guy who claimed my bustline
distracted him, causing his loss. What about his hormones?
"Chess politics makes even the Great Ones appear like
squabbling petty children."
All politics have this effect. However I must say that men have usually
treated me as an equal when talking money but they fall to pieces
regarding chess
Cardially
BarbaraVilliers
"
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-15, 5:52 pm |
|
"BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108460694.614190.80580@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
quote:
>
> Can you say how you personally feel denigrated by other women who play
>
> in "
> women-only competitions
> Yes indeed I do feel denigrated as I think players should play on equal
> terms and I dislike the idea of being viewed as a female chess player
> rather then a chess player. . I dislike segregation. I used to be
> Secretary of a Chess Club and we didn't have women or junior policy.
> Just chess for all. The recipe worked.
Hi Louise, Barbara
Thank you for re-stating your views.
quote:
> "For myself, I am arranging a few matches with all GMs, 2 men, 1 woman,
> and 1
> junior. Should I exclude the junior player? People think he is very
> interesting and a great prospect - maybe even a future world champion.
> Strictly on ELOs I could invite a stronger player, but not serve the
> same
> consitituency of interest, teenagers.The same is true of the woman
> player - should her ELO not be strong enough
> should I deny that she could play? In which case many women will not
> see,
> nor be encouraged by a female chess player, and they will see 4 guys
> playing
> four other guys.
>
>
> "
> I thought we were playing chess. Not representing certain groups.
And there's the rub! Who is 'we'? There is a constituency of chess viewer
who will take note of chess because of inclusion of junior players, and
women players. This interest does not denigrate the junior player, for
example, and I don't think I ever read of any resentment for including
juniors in chess competitions because it /demeans/ juniors.
quote:
> If
> the female player's ELO is not strong enough she should not be
> included.
quote:
>What makes you think that a woman needs female company to
> play chess?
I never wrote that she has ONLY female company, nor 'needs' it.
I played the Brit woman champion a couple of times in the English county
league, and we both took as high a board number as our chess justified at
the time. Even so, I was aware that she was the strongest woman player in
the UK by rating, and also by winning a woman's championship. Neither of us
felt demeaned by that factor.
Her work was often to demonstrate chess to constituencies of girls and young
women who would otherwise not enter the predominantly male arena. [Our
county league, for example, had about 200 players, 198 of them male, 1
female, and 1 'unclear'.]
quote:
> "But it seems to me that in reading of these affairs, you said to
> participant
> of USCL that you did not like women playing in women's chess, and women
>
> should play chess without any props or supports or separateness, and
> you
> insisted on this point of view [which seems to me honorably held by
> yourself], but the publisher did not agree with you that this was the
> only
> view possible, and, the result was that you would not compromise, and
> were
> fired. Is that it? "
quote:
> I was not fired because of my profile. I had been fired as a Senior
> Admin at the behest of Truong and Polgar over a week befor the noteban.
> I had agreed to stay at chess-live and help out behind the scenes with
> non staff status. I was happy to do this. However Truong and Polgar
> were not happy and had my profile notebanned and myself muted for
> mentioning that they had done this.I hasten to add that until I was
> fired my finger was immaculate without ever receiving a sanction.
>
> "Yes. You have babies. You have to play chess when you have your
> period. You
> are the primary care-takers of children in our society."
quote:
> Yes I have periods. They are not a disease and strangely enough they
> improve my play they do not adversly affect it. Periods are not a
> handicap but a natural occurrence.Women are not always wrapped up in
> child care.
Not all women, no. But predominantly so.
Since the matches currently being arranged are with some countries which are
not western European, this is also a positive factor in including women in
chess -- from countries where there is not such social liberal equity
between men's and women's responsibilities.
quote:
> I run a businness. My husband works long hours. Shouldn't
> he be considered as vulnerable from exhaustion of a long days work when
> he plays chess!!!
Well - you raise the question, answer it! For some couples with families,
perhaps there has been a sick child, and one or another parent will need to
take time from their work to nurse and comfort &c. I think it is very good
if in the UK your husband could get time from his work to relieve you of
this parental obligation so that you could properly prepare for a
forthcoming tournament, and also to do whatever child-care is necessary
while you attend a tournament.
Not all companies in all countries are as liberal in support of chess as the
UK!
quote:
> and how about the guy who claimed my bustline
> distracted him, causing his loss. What about his hormones?
We guys have tried every sort of excuse for losing. This is simply one of
our more credible, if not creditable, attempts 
quote:
> "Chess politics makes even the Great Ones appear like
> squabbling petty children."
quote:
> All politics have this effect. However I must say that men have usually
> treated me as an equal when talking money but they fall to pieces
> regarding chess
As far as I can see there are no advocates for keeping women out of mainline
chess among women themselves. There are advocates for also having a women's
series of events, and, as I understand them, these are represented as
necessary because the 'playing field is not equal' in terms of social
equality in the world, and also because in our society there is an
expectation that women with children will be the primary care-givers of
children.
I think there are many false reasons why women do not join mainline chess
and which really are denigrating to women.
But for the two reasons I offer in the paragraph above as my understanding
for an electional segregation -- do you find either of them demeaning, if it
is the /woman's/ choice to opt for women's chess?
Cordially, Phil Innes
quote:
> Cardially
> BarbaraVilliers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> "
>
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-15, 5:52 pm |
| "And there's the rub! Who is 'we'? There is a constituency of chess
viewer
who will take note of chess because of inclusion of junior players, and
women players. This interest does not denigrate the junior player, for
example, and I don't think I ever read of any resentment for including
juniors in chess competitions because it /demeans/ juniors. "
Phil
I know of many players in the Uk who do resent special treatment meeted
out to junior players. I statred we as in the members of the chess
club. I sincerely believe that inproving chess should be an opportunity
available for any enthusiastic player rather then focusing on special
groups.
"Well - you raise the question, answer it! For some couples with
families,
perhaps there has been a sick child, and one or another parent will
need to
take time from their work to nurse and comfort &c. I think it is very
good
if in the UK your husband could get time from his work to relieve you
of
this parental obligation so that you could properly prepare for a
forthcoming tournament, and also to do whatever child-care is necessary
while you attend a tournament.
Not all companies in all countries are as liberal in support of chess
as the
UK! "
The Uk is far from liberal about chess. The BBC refuses to show the
game calling it an elitist pastime. However I fail to see why my needs
should be of less importance then those of my husband and why I should
be a caregiver rather then half of a marriage.
"I was aware that she was the strongest woman player in
the UK by rating, and also by winning a woman's championship. Neither
of us
felt demeaned by that factor"
Personally I would not like that title. I recall a tourney where they
had a prize for the best female. I asked the organiser if that money
would be offered to the best male player if a woman won. His response
was don't be stupid!
"There are advocates for also having a women's
series of events, and, as I understand them, these are represented as
necessary because the 'playing field is not equal' in terms of social
equality in the world, and also because in our society there is an
expectation that women with children will be the primary care-givers of
children. "
There will never be social equality in this world until women learn to
refuse to comply with the rules of the playing field.Personally I
dislike domestic duties and rarely conform to the expectations of
society. I would be interested to hear your stories regarding insults
to women who play chess.
BarbaraVilliers
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-15, 5:52 pm |
|
"BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108483236.001626.159390@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> "And there's the rub! Who is 'we'? There is a constituency of chess
> viewer
> who will take note of chess because of inclusion of junior players, and
>
> women players. This interest does not denigrate the junior player, for
> example, and I don't think I ever read of any resentment for including
> juniors in chess competitions because it /demeans/ juniors. "
> Phil
quote:
> I know of many players in the Uk who do resent special treatment meeted
> out to junior players. I statred we as in the members of the chess
> club. I sincerely believe that inproving chess should be an opportunity
> available for any enthusiastic player rather then focusing on special
> groups.
We seem to have stopped exchanging on the same topic. I was asking if
juniors were 'demeaned' to use your term, in their own estimation of
themselves, by playing in Junior tournaments?
I am not trying to arbitrate any issue that has been written here, BUT, I am
saying that there is more than one opinion possible on these issues, and I
am not sure if you agree with this, since you are not acknowledging that
other people have other views [ which may be right or wrong, but just as
sincerely held as you own ]
quote:
> "Well - you raise the question, answer it! For some couples with
> families,
> perhaps there has been a sick child, and one or another parent will
> need to
> take time from their work to nurse and comfort &c. I think it is very
> good
> if in the UK your husband could get time from his work to relieve you
> of
> this parental obligation so that you could properly prepare for a
> forthcoming tournament, and also to do whatever child-care is necessary
>
> while you attend a tournament.
>
> Not all companies in all countries are as liberal in support of chess
> as the
> UK! "
quote:
> The Uk is far from liberal about chess. The BBC refuses to show the
> game calling it an elitist pastime.
I am writing with a BBC producer who has another opinion 
quote:
> However I fail to see why my needs
> should be of less importance then those of my husband and why I should
> be a caregiver rather then half of a marriage.
Neither do I. However, will his company afford him time-off to be an
equitable partner in the marriage, thus acknowledging that chess is as
important as his occupation? I think the answer is generally 'no'. And this
context effects women more than men, since typically in fact [rather than
'should be'] it is the woman who is the primary care-giver for children, and
even older folks, in our culture.
quote:
> "I was aware that she was the strongest woman player in
> the UK by rating, and also by winning a woman's championship. Neither
> of us
> felt demeaned by that factor"
quote:
> Personally I would not like that title. I recall a tourney where they
> had a prize for the best female. I asked the organiser if that money
> would be offered to the best male player if a woman won. His response
> was don't be stupid!
Wasn't it S. Polgar who did the same role-reversal to the Fide Men's Title?
How could she as a woman win it? Therefore they changed the title.
quote:
> "There are advocates for also having a women's
> series of events, and, as I understand them, these are represented as
> necessary because the 'playing field is not equal' in terms of social
> equality in the world, and also because in our society there is an
> expectation that women with children will be the primary care-givers of
>
> children. "
> There will never be social equality in this world until women learn to
> refuse to comply with the rules of the playing field.Personally I
> dislike domestic duties and rarely conform to the expectations of
> society. I would be interested to hear your stories regarding insults
> to women who play chess.
Another time. We are 'missing' too much here to really continue. I
understand you p.o.v. about women in chess. What is not so clear is if you
in fact support other women in chess who have a different point of view,
especially those women with children?
Cordially, Phil Innes
quote:
> BarbaraVilliers
>
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-15, 5:52 pm |
| Hi Phil
no I don't support women playing female chess. I'm sorry I thought I
made it clear. Yes others have different views to me and indeed that is
their right. Life would be dull if we held the same views. However I
disapprove of a few things and am not afraid to say so.Women don't have
children alone. Usually a man helps create them.
BarbaraVilliers
| |
| Aurora 2005-02-15, 5:52 pm |
| Phil
I might agree with some of your points about the reasons for women only
events if this process of segregating women into female only events
didn't start when they are juniors and as such have no caring
responsibilities.
Aurora
| |
| GreenCastle 2005-02-15, 9:47 pm |
| Ray Gordon wrote:
quote:
Truong is[vbcol=seagreen]
his[vbcol=seagreen]
the[vbcol=seagreen]
lecture.[vbcol=seagreen]
>
> Well the one way to resolve this would be to have it done by webcam.
>
>
> --
> Ray Gordon, Author
> http://www.cybersheet.com/easy.html
> Seduction Made Easy. Get this book FREE when you buy participating
> affiliated books!
>
> http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
> The Seduction Library. Four free books to get you started on your
quest to
quote:
> get laid.
>
> Don't buy anything from experts who won't debate on a free speech
forum.
If the server had integrity which it does not, we wouldn't NEED to
resolve this. We would trust that a player the server's staff presents
as Susan Polgar really is in fact Susan Polgar.
With Truong in charge this trust is broken because of Truong's long
history of masquerading as other people (Rafael Rodriguez, Bob Bennet,
etc) for the purpose of insulting people over the internet. Truong
should have resigned as staff when it was revealed by me that he
masqueraded as Susan Polgar. Instead, him and most of the admin staff
tried to cover it up.
It is this lack of trust which makes USCL unique. No one would doubt
that a player ICC staff claims is Joel Benjamin, really is Joel
Benjamin. ICC is far too successful to attempt such idiotic ploys.
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-15, 9:47 pm |
|
"BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108488959.037888.46490@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Hi Phil
> no I don't support women playing female chess. I'm sorry I thought I
> made it clear.
Barbara, or is it Louise?
I don't /care/ if what you 'support' [what does that mean?] is for or
against a womens' development path in chess. I do care that you only
represent your own opinion!
You do not seem to care for what other women have expressed, or have even
/acknowledged/ those things in your writing here.
We are no longer engaged on any subject where our opinions meet, and I could
see why proclaiming your own views to the general public could cause you to
lack the support of your publisher, who might feel that this was more than a
temporary flare of emotion, and as a significant indulgence.
You have never expressed any understanding of what other women have said
regarding these issues.
quote:
> Yes others have different views to me and indeed that is
> their right. Life would be dull if we held the same views. However I
> disapprove of a few things and am not afraid to say so.
I never accused you of acting from the basis of fear.
quote:
>Women don't have
> children alone. Usually a man helps create them.
I do not think I should write with you further. I think you are not a
parent, [ I have been a single parent myself,] and I also have no fear in
expressing my opinion; that yours is inadequate to represent 'women in
chess' or even parenthood - do you represent anything more than your own
strong opinions about yourseld as chess player, rather than of women in
chess?
I was never seeking any argument with you - but wrote only to discover how
much you were aware of the state of 'women in chess'.
I now have a better understanding of this issue.
Thank you for your writing about this subject.
Cordially, Phil Innes
quote:
> BarbaraVilliers
>
| |
| clarkbarr 2005-02-16, 3:50 am |
|
On 2/15/05 2:19 PM, in article
1108505974.530897.110340@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com, "GreenCastle"
<greencastle2004@yahoo.com> wrote:
quote:
>
> If the server had integrity which it does not, we wouldn't NEED to
> resolve this. We would trust that a player the server's staff presents
> as Susan Polgar really is in fact Susan Polgar.
>
> With Truong in charge this trust is broken because of Truong's long
> history of masquerading as other people (Rafael Rodriguez, Bob Bennet,
> etc) for the purpose of insulting people over the internet. Truong
> should have resigned as staff when it was revealed by me that he
> masqueraded as Susan Polgar. Instead, him and most of the admin staff
> tried to cover it up.
>
> It is this lack of trust which makes USCL unique. No one would doubt
> that a player ICC staff claims is Joel Benjamin, really is Joel
> Benjamin. ICC is far too successful to attempt such idiotic ploys.
>
Yes, the assholes who run USCL are too busy fabricating charges against
cheaters. They have an "enemies list" that would have been Nixon's envy.
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-16, 6:47 am |
| Phil
I think what you really mean is I do not show enough emphathy with
other women.I don't like segregating people into genders, ages etc.
They are all people to me and either I like them or I don't.I didn't
realise we are arguing. I thought we were having a debate.
Re Publisher, I am confused as I do not write about chess
professionally or otherwise. My writing encompasses different topics.
However I did ask you to relate the experiences of other women in chess
and you declined to do so.
Why do some men prefer tothink of women as victims rather then tough
ballsy creatures who might enjoy a mixed battle of the sexes?
BarbaraVilliers
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-16, 6:47 am |
| yes Greencastle you state the problem. It is the cover ups for Truong
that cause much of the trouble on the server.Why Truong feels the need
to disguise his identity I do not understand. If I care to insult
someone I do it openly without using pseudo names. Truong works in the
dark trying to destroy a very nice server with people who mostly
decent.The server owes plenty to workers such as GreenCatle who give
time and effort without any power or salary.
Some of those Sr's work very hard and get little thanks except maybe SR
of the month. There are quiter admins who have been with the server for
a long while but they get little recognition (and no I am not
referrring myself here) I am talking of guys like Kratz, Luckykaa and
other self effacing decent guys with no political agenda.
BarbaraVilliers
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-16, 5:50 pm |
|
"BarbaraVilliers" <louise@cernunos.globalnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108544269.350730.234530@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
quote:
> Phil
> I think what you really mean is I do not show enough emphathy with
> other women.
Any empathy.
quote:
>I don't like segregating people into genders, ages etc.
> They are all people to me and either I like them or I don't.I didn't
> realise we are arguing. I thought we were having a debate.
I understand your views - and I am not 'debating them', but asking if you
understand other people's views - not if you agree with their views, but
recognise that they have 'em!
quote:
> Re Publisher, I am confused as I do not write about chess
> professionally or otherwise.
Your previous employer is a de facto e-publisher of on-line commentary, by
members and staff people.
quote:
> My writing encompasses different topics.
> However I did ask you to relate the experiences of other women in chess
> and you declined to do so.
Yes I decline to do so. They are mostly private, not public, communications.
quote:
> Why do some men prefer tothink of women as victims rather then tough
> ballsy creatures who might enjoy a mixed battle of the sexes?
For the same reason that they are afraid of men! The most common form of put
down in this newsgroup is the suggestion that other people's ideas are not
very 'virile' because of (a) mental incompetence, and (b) drug related
debility, and (c) a variety of terms which reduce the erstwhile
correspondent to something less than a human being.
Psychologically, I think these are no different than fear-of-females.
Because people are more afraid of 'losing' their argument rather than
'winning' any understanding?
If you really wish to have a debate then I suggest that it cannot be about
your own recent situation, but about the role of women in chess. This would
probably comprise 2 significant factors - not who agrees with you, and who
has other views - but what men think and what women think.
Cordially, Phil Innes
quote:
> BarbaraVilliers
>
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-16, 5:50 pm |
| "you
understand other people's views - not if you agree with their views,
but
recognise that they have 'em! "
Yes I understand that others have different views. I stated this
earlier.
Re empathy I have it for people not groups as such.
"Your previous employer is a de facto e-publisher of on-line
commentary, by
members and staff people."
Joel Berez never employed me. There was no contract or payment between
us. I did my bit in Support on the Server.I helped mainly behind the
scenes. I will stress that it was unpaid work and I signed nothing to
ban me from expressing a viewpoint neither would I have done.
"Yes I decline to do so. They are mostly private, not public,
communications. "
Thats fair enough. If they are confidential I would not expect you to
tell me about those experiences.
"The most common form of put
down in this newsgroup is the suggestion that other people's ideas are
not
very 'virile' because of (a) mental incompetence, and (b) drug related
debility, and (c) a variety of terms which reduce the erstwhile
correspondent to something less than a human being.
Psychologically, I think these are no different than fear-of-females.
Because people are more afraid of 'losing' their argument rather than
'winning' any understanding? "
This is a very common put down and not exclusive to this group. I get
lambasted for being rightwing as though that makes me a monster. I
wasn't aware that we all had to be Lib in our outlook. My husband has
been attacked for precisely no reason I can see. I get the impression
that these attacks are merely a way of dealing with someone who doesn't
go by the Status Quo. I'm quite happy to debate the role of female only
events but you must accept I personally disapprove of them. That does
not make either of us right or wrong. It is holding a different
viewpoint,maybe you can learn something from my opinions.Possibly you
could alter mine, without coherent communication we won't find out.
BarbaraVilliers
| |
| Chess One 2005-02-16, 5:50 pm |
| > Psychologically, I think these are no different than fear-of-females.
quote:
> Because people are more afraid of 'losing' their argument rather than
> 'winning' any understanding? "
> This is a very common put down and not exclusive to this group. I get
> lambasted for being rightwing as though that makes me a monster. I
> wasn't aware that we all had to be Lib in our outlook. My husband has
> been attacked for precisely no reason I can see. I get the impression
> that these attacks are merely a way of dealing with someone who doesn't
> go by the Status Quo. I'm quite happy to debate the role of female only
> events but you must accept I personally disapprove of them. That does
> not make either of us right or wrong.
Well... You score big points with me for making that 'not right or wrong'
statement, Barbara!
If only more people in newsgroups understood the role of debate, then some
cause for attack and defence would be removed, and we could actually share
our differing perspectives like adult human beings!
Quite possibly by speaking more fully than we do at present as if we had 3
dimensional lives and chess was only a part of it; and engaging more the
qualities of things we encounter, rather than this 'right or wrongness'
stuff which is a form of banging each other on the head with our club-shaped
opinions, like neanderthals!
quote:
> It is holding a different
> viewpoint,maybe you can learn something from my opinions.Possibly you
> could alter mine, without coherent communication we won't find out.
I would suspect something about my own motivation if I wanted to change your
opinion.
For me, a goal would be to increment [maybe to correct what I already think
I 'know'] my own understanding of an issue by taking in another's
perspective. I rarely care what other people think, or why, but am usually
interested in how much of themselves went into forming their opinion - was
it just some nervous response, or was it some deeply held feeling born of
experience?
It is a more complex issue to deal with 'approval' -- which is sometimes a
euphemism, no? What does it mean? I do not need approval to hold my own
opinions (except perhaps self-approval), and I could choose to express my
opinions or otherwise, without dependency on others' approval. I am usually
indifferent to other's response from any "approval' perspective alone.
In terms of approving other people's behavior, do you agree that that is a
more complex subject?
What do we mean when we say it? Is approval the same as 'respect' eg? Or
does it mean 'understand' or 'agree with'? Maybe something else?
Cordially, Phil Innes
quote:
> BarbaraVilliers
>
| |
|
| Ahh, karma is a wonderful thing
After months of ranting and raving about various ethnic groups, harrassing
members and abusing her position as an admin, it all catches up with BV.
Yes, you can deny you ever said anything, but lots of us know the truth,
and we know lying is just a reflex for you.
I was banned from Chess Live because BV claimed i called her a nazi, which
i didn't, and refused to apologize for. I also lost my SR position at the
site, despite being one of the most active SRs at the time, and one of the
few on at early morning server time. No doubt BV was in a position to
help more people than i did, despite her inability to find the kibitz
window...
Only one person saw this 'incident', and he saw exactly what i said
BV publicly insulted me on many occasions as an admin, but whenever i
replied i was in the wrong and told to 'ignore her'(i guess its members,
not admins that are supposed to set an example)
Didn't mind Truong or Amsterdooms help then, did you?
BV was eventually reduced to telling people to beat me at chess (she
couldn't do it herself, after i gave her Knight for Queen odds, and she
still lost). An amazing coincidence that this kid used fritz, but BV
wouldnt know anything about that im sure
Well i guess thats one of the symptoms of the chess live disease cured,
one that i know for a fact was the specific reason paying members
(including admins) left
I'd like to spend some time 'debating' the topic of women only events in
chess, but the last time i did that BVs husband felt the need to send me a
threatening message
Nice way to show women can stand up for themselves
Despite the large number of problems Chess Live has, i have faith in most
of the admins and think with a little luck it will become one of the best
sites on the net
Fired 
| |
| BarbaraVilliers 2005-02-16, 5:50 pm |
| "If only more people in newsgroups understood the role of debate, then
some
cause for attack and defence would be removed, and we could actually
share
our differing perspectives like adult human beings! "
Phil I agree with you big time on this issue. I personally enjoy debate
and I am at a loss to understand why people on newsgroups get so angry
over discussion.We should be able to share our differing perspectives
with open minds and a pleasure in exchanging ideas. But unfortunately
it often turns into a bun fight.For me, a goal would be to increment
[maybe to correct what I already think
"I 'know'] my own understanding of an issue by taking in another's
perspective. I rarely care what other people think, or why, but am
usually
interested in how much of themselves went into forming their opinion -
was
it just some nervous response, or was it some deeply held feeling born
of
experience? "
With me if I form an opinion its usually from observation, study and
experience. I never decide black is black because someone stated it to
be so. I'm curious about many subjects and have studied psychology
among others. Often people do seem to be brainwashed into certain
thought patterns and opinions. Many people rely on the media (mainly
the TV) for their opinions. Its often a sort of mental laziness I think
and as a result we see a dumbed down society.I try to retain an open
mind and I enjoy listening to different opinions as its refreshing for
my intellect.Often I ask others where they got their views from and
usually I get a profound silence.
"In terms of approving other people's behavior, do you agree that that
is a
more complex subject?"
Yes I think it is.I have seen on newsgroups where someone gets their
views approved of. Not always because people agree with them but
because they want to be seen to be in the right clique. All of society
has a social hierarchy and pecking order. If you disagree openly with
the "leaders " Its usual for repercussions to occur. Personally I liken
it to the bully in the school yard syndrome.Kids are afraid to not fit
in with the demands of the bully and will do almost anytjing to gain
peer approval unless they are the rare type that cannot be bothered to
conform. Normally through confidence or total indifference.I think your
attitude towards expressing your views is exceedingly
refreshing.Personally I would liken approval to agreement rather then
respect.You can agree with a view without respecting the viewpoint
holder.
BarbaraVilliers
| |
|
| |