Chess One wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
4. Do you find these three statements equally credible? Discuss.
Discuss what with whom?
I have been discussing ethical factors relating to women and children in
chess for the past year.
Bill Brock has not been discussing that subject with anyone, he has been
scapegoating one person out of some confused presentation of his own motives
in a strange agit-prop campaign, seeming to want to write about a little
porn more than the person he accuses 
Mr. Brock has never said he agrees to any measure that is an objective one
for all people, and considering the strange-brew of his own past which he
has semi-hemi hinted and 'joked' about - its as if he wants to expunge that,
much more than attend to offenses to women and children.
As such, this is all about him.
Phil Innes
Polgar publicly accuses Sloan of being morally unfit to serve as a
fiduciary, and claims that Sloan had sexually propositioned her when
she was sixteen years old. In response, Sloan publicly claims (in two
separate statements, both in the course of USCF matters) that his
relationship with the teenaged Susan Polgar was "not entirely Platonic"
and that certain details of this relationship are "seamy."
Innes's response? "As such, this is all about [Bill Brock]."
I am amused.