| Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) 2005-04-26, 8:34 pm |
|
Sam Sloan wrote:
quote:
>
> [...] Edward Winter does not merely engage in intellectual debate.
> He attacks people personally.He tries to get people banned and
> blacklisted. He threatens lawsuits.
If Edward Winter owned a pulishing House or were in a
position of power then his alleged nasty ways could be
possibly harmful. It looks that it is not the case, hence
his non-historical activities can be safely ignored.
quote:
> For example, in his 1986 "Ethics Complaint" to FIDE Edward Winter
> included copies of his correspndence with Batsford Publications which
> was publishing chess books by Raymond Keene. The gravamenmt of his
> complaints was that Keene was writing primarily opening books whereas
> Winter wanted Batsford to publish books on chess history.
This sounds rather silly than nasty. I don't see
any rational for Winter to complain to FIDE about Barsford's
policy. FIDE has no authority over Batsford Publ., does it?
quote:
> Yes, I know. Taylor Kingston claims that it is preposterous that
> Winter would write such a letter, but he did.
Indeed, it is hard to believe it unless Mr. Winter is a tiny little
bit nutty.
quote:
> Similarly, Taylor Kingston has out of the blue started attacking me
to
quote:
> stop me from being elected, using such words as "lies" and
> "fabrications" and "untruths" to describe my comments about Edward
> Winter, when Mr. Kingston does not know Edward Winter.
Sam, you surprise me. Where is your sense of humor, sense
of proportions, and hm-hm common sense.
You are running for a public office. This means that
you are opening yourself to inquires. The outcome of
each inquiry can go either way. Each of them gives you
a chance to look better, more suitable for the position,
when you are able to face the inquiry. Taylor gave you
this kind of a chance, but you blew it. His was truly a
minor one. The discussion in this thread about
the length of Mr. Winter's document leads its readers
to the conclusion that indeed that document had 2+22
pages, and only when multuplied by 5 languages
(the original document + 4 translations) the
resulting number of pages had exceeded 100.
Thus you have neglected to mention the information
that the total reached 100+ pg-s AFTER including
the translations. This is a minor thing but it does
not look like an innocent ommission on your part.
In such a situation you should, in my opinion, cut
your losses and admit that you have made a misleading
statement. It still would not be a big deal. Instead
you have performed a prolonged equilibristic act.
What's worse, you let some epithets fly, and you
have accused Taylor of using epithets, while he
has not done it.
Since you react like this when you are not
in a position of power then what should one expect
when you would? "Give a man power and he will
make angels cry!" -- a friend of mine, A.J., told me
that this deeply profound, moving and disturbing
quote is from Koran.
Possibly you would be sweet, kind and understanding
when elected, but how should the voters know it when
you act small, when you don't act straight?
Regards,
Wlod
PS. It's ironic that this discussion takes
place in the context of USCF :-)
|