This appeared in the Fide Yahoo group under the title; free speech, etc. Its
a good illustration of what's wrong with free speech alone, since I try to
illustrate that what is free is of no necessary merit if it ain't coupled
with what is responsible speech. In short; is the motive clear what the
issue is being raised? Consistently with Sam Sloan over the past 18 months I
can't think he is raising any issue in order to fix it, but has other
motive. I was disappointed with his board tenure, thereby. Phil Innes

Just in case anyone here is still interested, would the phrase 'won
4 world
titles' offend anyone?

Phil Innes

If she said that, I do not think that anybody would object.

**perhaps you could make this a suggestion, therefore, rather than a plaint?

However, what actually happens is she allows others to say in her
presence that she "Won the Woman's World Championship four times".

**well, if you are disposed to only complain, and repeat what you don't
like, then aren't you promoting the very thing you disagree with? Again,
simple re-phrasing does the trick, i.e.: "won four woman's world titles,
[including world championship]."

That statement is clearly not true. It appears on the TV video about
her "Make Me a Genius", in the speech by the President of Texas Tech
University just prior to her commencement speech, on the USCF website,
on several recent television shows about her and many other places.

I wonder what these broadcasters will think when they find out that
this statement is a lie.

**When the media people got after my resume of this and that, i declared i
used to be an alpine climber, but the way it was represented was as if i had
soloed Everest without oxygen in midwinter. media hype everything up, often
over-dramatising material - another example is the nonsense appearing on the
back of book jackets over which the poor author has no control.

**it's one thing to observe what may be likely to cause misunderstanding,
but alone that does nothing to /resolve/ the issue - after a year on the
board, isn't that clear to you, Sam Sloan - a person who raised hundreds of
issues, but didn't resolve any of them? your own motives, you see, are
rather suspect here, preferring to champion truth by exposing perceived
faults of others, rather than remedy them by working /with/ others.

**If it seems like a real wish to resolve something, rather than utilise it
to grandstand personal heroics, then your questions would have greater
chance of being taken seriously, rather than as would-be interrogator to no
clear result.

Phil Innes
-----

Sam Sloan