On Oct 10, 5:19 pm, wrote:
Mike Murray wrote:
On Wed, 10 Oct 2007 11:45:03 -0700, Taylor Kingston
wrote:

Wouldn't it be better for Wikipedia to have articles only on people
of some importance?

It's his turn for 15 minutes. Why are you begrudging him that?

Because he's abusing the legal system with (yet another) frivolous
lawsuit in order to get the attention he craves? He's a worthless
parasite ("I am a bum. I live off my wife, who works ... I think that
just about covers it." -- Sam Sloan on the USCF Forums, March 14,
2007), and should be treated like any other unwashed sidewalk
screamer. Ignore him.

The anti-Sloan bias here is overwhelming.

Let's try to be just a tad more objective, shall we?
I read one complaint that Mr. Sloan was changing
diapers at the chess board, distracting/annoying
his opponents to no end. Now other critics want
to pretend that he does nothing at all, that he is a
"bum". You can't have it both ways, people. If SS
is changing diapers in front of witnesses, then he is
certainly not "a bum" who does nothing; this may
not make him, technically, a housewife, but by
golly it makes him a care-giver or homemaker or
baby-sitter or something besides just a bum.


The encyclopedias may be better off to leave the
issue of frivolousity alone until after the matter is
settled. What's the big rush? Is it not sufficient
to just mention that there are lawsuits in progress,
and summarize what they are in regard to? It is
OK to say that the Sloan suit has been dismissed
by defendants as frivolous, but there is no hurry to
make a final pronouncement here; time will tell.


-- help bot