DAY 5

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan. 2000 words, chop chop.
Day 5. -- Bill Brock, who lost a match to Sam Sloan in Chicago

With all due respect to those a bit potty and,
indeed, who are outright crackpots, one has to say
that Bill Brock is a psychoceramic himself. Once
again, we note that Mr. Brock has presented no proof
that Sam Sloan has committed any sexual crimes.

Just more smears aimed at misdirecting the focus
away from board member Randy Bauer.

Yours, Larry Parr




wrote:
On Dec 13, 9:34 am, wrote:
http://www.samsloan.com/forbiddendreams.htm

http://www.samsloan.com/ininlaw.htm

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan.

2000 words, chop chop.

Day 5.

I understand your position re Bauer.

Re Sloan: is it fair to say that you find the web links below
unproblematic, and that you continue to find him qualified to serve on
the board of a national nonprofit organization with more than 40,000
junior members?



On Dec 18, 6:46 am, " wrote:
DAY 5

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan. 2000 words, chop chop.

Day 5. -- Bill Brock, who lost a match to Sam Sloan in Chicago

With all due respect to those a bit potty and,
indeed, who are outright crackpots, one has to say
that Bill Brock is a psychoceramic himself. Once
again, we note that Mr. Brock has presented no proof
that Sam Sloan has committed any sexual crimes.

Just more smears aimed at misdirecting the focus
away from board member Randy Bauer.

Yours, Larry Parr

wrote:
On Dec 13, 9:34 am, wrote:
http://www.samsloan.com/forbiddendreams.htm

http://www.samsloan.com/ininlaw.htm

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan.

2000 words, chop chop.

Day 5.

Day 6.

On Dec 18, 9:27 am, wrote:
I understand your position re Bauer.

Re Sloan: is it fair to say that you find the web links below
unproblematic, and that you continue to find him qualified to serve on
the board of a national nonprofit organization with more than 40,000
junior members?

On Dec 18, 6:46 am, " wrote:

DAY 5

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan. 2000 words, chop chop.

Day 5. -- Bill Brock, who lost a match to Sam Sloan in Chicago

With all due respect to those a bit potty and,
indeed, who are outright crackpots, one has to say
that Bill Brock is a psychoceramic himself. Once
again, we note that Mr. Brock has presented no proof
that Sam Sloan has committed any sexual crimes.

Just more smears aimed at misdirecting the focus
away from board member Randy Bauer.

Yours, Larry Parr

wrote:
On Dec 13, 9:34 am, wrote:
http://www.samsloan.com/forbiddendreams.htm

http://www.samsloan.com/ininlaw.htm

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan.

2000 words, chop chop.

Day 5.

Day 6. ;-)

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 04:46:00 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

DAY 5

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan. 2000 words, chop chop.
Day 5. -- Bill Brock, who lost a match to Sam Sloan in Chicago

With all due respect to those a bit potty and,
indeed, who are outright crackpots, one has to say
that Bill Brock is a psychoceramic himself. Once
again, we note that Mr. Brock has presented no proof
that Sam Sloan has committed any sexual crimes.

Just more smears aimed at misdirecting the focus
away from board member Randy Bauer.

Yours, Larry Parr



What it does show is that sam sloan has no moral compass.
Anyone who would put these stories on his web page shows that he total
lacks any common sense. I know its not politically correct to talk
about moral values but sometimes the obvious has to be noted. The
emperor has no cloths...

These stories may not be a 'sexual crime' but I would seriously
question any man who has a daughter and could get any enjoyment out of
these stories. Does that not send a warning flag to you??? I wouldnt
let him within 100' of my daughter...

you are right they aren't criminal, but to 99%of the population, they
are completely immoral.

J.Lohner


wrote:
On Dec 13, 9:34 am, wrote:
http://www.samsloan.com/forbiddendreams.htm

http://www.samsloan.com/ininlaw.htm

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan.

2000 words, chop chop.

Day 5.

BILL BROCK'S VOYEURISM

These stories may not be a 'sexual crime' but I would seriously question any man who has a daughter and could get any enjoyment out of these stories. -- J. Lohner

We have another poster attacking Sam Sloan,
first and foremost, and this writer secondarily.

I have no interest in reviewing sexually related
materials on Sam Sloan's site or other outlets. My
popcult entertainment involves listening to MP3 disks
with old-time radio programs such as The Great
Gildersleeve, Fibber McGee and Molly, Paul Temple (the
all-time great radio detective program, produced by the
BBC) and to be sure, Suspense, the ultimate OTR program.

I find it fascinating that the censorious types
such as our Bill Brock, first and foremost, apparently
are very well read indeed in sexual materials, whereas
many of us find such voyeurism not so much immoral,
though certainly hypocritical, as downright boring. Give
me instead an old program of Information Please with
with Alexander Woollcott, Dorothy Parker, Franklin P.
Adams and, say, Robert Benchley any day.

Voyeurism, which is explicit in so much current
entertainment, bores.

Secondly, I don't consider what people post on
the Internet to be in itself determinative, though
suggestive and occasionally predictive. So far as I
have been able to determine, Sam Sloan went to jail
on one occasion over an affair of the heart involving his
daughter. Many fathers, especially in these pc times,
would have acted as he did. I might have, if I were in
the same predicament. Any father here who says
otherwise is knowingly lying.

Thirdly, since the discussion is about chess,
the truly relevant subject matter is whether Sam has
been a positive influence in USCF affairs. The
evident answer is a clear and resounding YES!

Several of the attackers here are in de facto
league with the USCF Executive Board. You all have
witnessed the dishonest spinmeister Randy Bauer doing
a song-and-dance recently on this forum. He came, he
bellowed, he slunk away -- until given his next spin
assignment here. I find such behavior more
reprehensible than anything proven or, in several
instances, even alleged against Sam Sloan.

Yours, Larry Parr

-


wrote:
DAY 5

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan. 2000 words, chop chop.
Day 5. -- Bill Brock, who lost a match to Sam Sloan in Chicago

With all due respect to those a bit potty and,
indeed, who are outright crackpots, one has to say
that Bill Brock is a psychoceramic himself. Once
again, we note that Mr. Brock has presented no proof
that Sam Sloan has committed any sexual crimes.

Just more smears aimed at misdirecting the focus
away from board member Randy Bauer.

Yours, Larry Parr




wrote:
On Dec 13, 9:34 am, wrote:
http://www.samsloan.com/forbiddendreams.htm

http://www.samsloan.com/ininlaw.htm

Need Parr's celebration of incest in defense of Sloan.

2000 words, chop chop.

Day 5.

http://direkickfeud.blogspot.com/200...-to-evade.html

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, indeed.

On Dec 19, 1:53 am, wrote:
http://direkickfeud.blogspot.com/200...ontinues-to-ev...

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men, indeed.

Day 7.

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:10:40 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:

BILL BROCK'S VOYEURISM

These stories may not be a 'sexual crime' but I would seriously question any man who has a daughter and could get any enjoyment out of these stories. -- J. Lohner

We have another poster attacking Sam Sloan,
first and foremost, and this writer secondarily.


This was in no way an attack on you. I have read your articles in
'chess canada' and have enjoyed them. If my post was taken as an
insult towards yourself, I do apologize.

Yes this was an attack on Mr. Sloans Character. I believe that
character is very important when chosing a leader no matter what
position the person is running for.

I find it fascinating that the censorious types
such as our Bill Brock, first and foremost, apparently
are very well read indeed in sexual materials, whereas
many of us find such voyeurism not so much immoral,
though certainly hypocritical, as downright boring.

Certainly most people would not care if Mr sloan was posting
'average' sexual materials, but when the posts include subjects like
incest I would strongly object to this person holding any position in
any political body.

Thirdly, since the discussion is about chess,
the truly relevant subject matter is whether Sam has
been a positive influence in USCF affairs. The
evident answer is a clear and resounding YES!

This is where I would say that it is a resounding NO!
If Sam Sloan won a position on the Canadian Chess Federation board, I
would not renew my membership. Im sure many others that I know would
do the same. Mr Sloan seems to enjoy 'stirring the pot' without
researching his facts. This can't be positive.

Mr. Sloan is also very annoying. His constant spamming of unrelated
newsgroups with his political 'news' shows that he has no manners or
common sense. Im sure I am not the only one who has added his name
to their 'twit filter'. Of all the annoying spammers in this
newsgroup (and other related chess groups) Mr. Sloan was the FIRST
name I filtered out. There are several people here who strongly
disagree on various subjects, but are willing to debate with civility.
Mr Sloan is not one of them. I can't see how his spamming is 'good
for chess'.

J.Lohner

On Dec 20, 2:49 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:10:40 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
BILLBROCK'SVOYEURISM

These stories may not be a 'sexual crime' but I would seriously question any man who has a daughter and could get any enjoyment out of these stories. -- J. Lohner

We have another poster attacking Sam Sloan,
first and foremost, and this writer secondarily.

This was in no way an attack on you. I have read your articles in
'chess canada' and have enjoyed them. If my post was taken as an
insult towards yourself, I do apologize.

Yes this was an attack on Mr. Sloans Character. I believe that
character is very important when chosing a leader no matter what
position the person is running for.

I find it fascinating that the censorious types
such as our BillBrock, first and foremost, apparently
are very well read indeed in sexual materials, whereas
many of us find such voyeurism not so much immoral,
though certainly hypocritical, as downright boring.

Certainly most people would not care if Mr sloan was posting
'average' sexual materials, but when the posts include subjects like
incest I would strongly object to this person holding any position in
any political body.


[...]

Human sexuality is a wonderful thing, and I don't necessarily find
explicit sexual material problematic in itself.

But we should strive to treat other people as people, as fellow
subjects. Not as chattel, not as objects for use. Without getting
into details here, there are certain choices that an adult is
competent to make, but that a child simply cannot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_and_Thou (recommended by one postmodern
atheist)

On Dec 21, 12:41 pm, wrote:
On Dec 20, 2:49 pm, wrote:



On Tue, 18 Dec 2007 22:10:40 -0800 (PST), "

wrote:
BILLBROCK'SVOYEURISM

These stories may not be a 'sexual crime' but I would seriously question any man who has a daughter and could get any enjoyment out of these stories. -- J. Lohner

We have another poster attacking Sam Sloan,
first and foremost, and this writer secondarily.

This was in no way an attack on you. I have read your articles in
'chess canada' and have enjoyed them. If my post was taken as an
insult towards yourself, I do apologize.

Yes this was an attack on Mr. Sloans Character. I believe that
character is very important when chosing a leader no matter what
position the person is running for.

I find it fascinating that the censorious types
such as our BillBrock, first and foremost, apparently
are very well read indeed in sexual materials, whereas
many of us find such voyeurism not so much immoral,
though certainly hypocritical, as downright boring.

Certainly most people would not care if Mr sloan was posting
'average' sexual materials, but when the posts include subjects like
incest I would strongly object to this person holding any position in
any political body.

[...]

Human sexuality is a wonderful thing, and I don't necessarily find
explicit sexual material problematic in itself.

But we should strive to treat other people as people, as fellow
subjects. Not as chattel, not as objects for use. Without getting
into details here, there are certain choices that an adult is
competent to make, but that a child simply cannot.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_and_Thou(recommended by one postmodern
atheist)

Hmm, the summary of _I and Thou_ in WP is terrible. There's a much
better summary in the article on Buber:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Buber#Philosophy