| Chess One 2005-03-13, 5:54 pm |
|
"Randy Bauer" <randybauer2300@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4vXWd.101895$tl3.50824@attbi_s02...
quote:
>
> <parrthenon@cs.com> wrote in message
> news:1110186066.548970.227440@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> Candidates and those who support their views are often lumped together.
By independent commentators, if they appear to be at all the same. When
incumbents characterise all those who are against them, it is something
else, no? What's the name for that again?
It is simply regretable that a bit of chess news cannot be trusted to the
members or the general population, it is also something else when commentary
is also taken over by incumbents themselves.
quote:
> I laid out a framework for determining whether or not somebody was a
> Sloanista.
Why did you do it? Is it honest? Did you think it would make others
unpopular to be associated with Sam Sloan? Are you pretending to a level of
objectivity that non-incumbents have?
quote:
> Parr, rather than defend his support for the guy who drains USCF
> resources by filing lawsuit upon lawsuit against the organization, goes on
> the attack.
I suppose there are those who think 'draining' <your term> USCF resources
can be accomplished by any party. At least Sam Sloan has written his
critique //in public//, while those insiders who 'drain' <your term> its
resources are permitted to do so in camera.
quote:
> I didn't lump any other candidates because I have heard none express
> support of Sloan. It wasn't meant to be a smear; my guess is it is only
> senseless among the mendacious.
ho hum. As a commentator or a journalist you would not be very good, since
you do not discuss the issues, as raised by Sam Sloan, for example, and you
only 'characterise' them.
Being a politico is your realm, and you are confusing what engages people's
intelligence by suggesting that an attitude about the questioner is
sufficient response to the issues raised by the questioner.
People will make up their own minds on the issues, not the personalities.
They will also look at the process by which things are decided and make
their determinations thereby.
Have you personally been able to address and share the issues as datum and
process, in conversations with others here who have the same information?
Or, overall all, have you decided that other people have no rights to
discuss them or even know about them? That is a journalist's question - if
you reply, let it be on the record.
Phil Innes
quote:
> Randy Bauer
>
|