On Thu, 04 Oct 2007 19:29:29 GMT, "Chess One"
wrote:


--a little pause in this diatribe-- my son, a 5th year engineering student
says that his [name-brand] engineering school have hacked everything, every
thing at every level. its a sort of joke thing among them. what 'experts'
working with the non-profit uscf will understand, he said, is not likely to
impress him, and causes him some amusement -- okay, back to the main
psycho-drama

Those with the skill, the motivation, and the resources have always
been able to fake evidence, Phil. That's what we call the "frame-up".
The perpetual cry of the perp: "I been framed". And some people do
get framed. This is no different from thousands of other cases that
ultimately get decided one way or the other. But you have to
remember, just because it's theoretically possible to hack evidence
doesn't prove evidence *was* hacked. To decide this requires
investigation and judgment.

And when there's a lot of evidence, you really need this investigation
and judgment. You can't just blithely say, "well, since it's possible
to have hacked this evidence, we can just ignore it".

While Sam Sloan's rejected suitor orientation is as plain as day, does he
really think he is so central to chess that perhaps the most successful
promoter of it in the USA has time to, sort-of, mock him, as if he himself
were the *star* of it all, except in his own mind.

You haven't been paying real close attention, Phil. Two things to
remember: (1) many others than Sloan were faked, and (2) the fake
Sloan was used as a vehicle or club to attack other players, board
candidates and issues.