"samsloan" wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
Will someone please come up with a new chess scandal.. just to keep
things interesting. It is getting kinda dull around here.

Old Haasie

Sorry, but I have been muzzled.




"Duncan Oxley" No@Thanks wrote in message ...

"g4" wrote


How did you like reading about Sam Sloan's muzzlement? Must have felt
like a kick in the stomach, eh larry?


I missed this. Can you give me a link or explain what happened please?

TIA

--Duncan

Oh, I read that but I was under the impression that the
poster was one of the Sloan imposters. Is that the real Sloan? LOL these
guys
have me completely flummoxed as to who is real and who is a fake. And even
the fakes seem to have fakes. Doh!

--Duncan

"g4" wrote in message
...

"samsloan" wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
Will someone please come up with a new chess scandal.. just to keep
things interesting. It is getting kinda dull around here.

Old Haasie

Sorry, but I have been muzzled.




"Duncan Oxley" No@Thanks wrote in message
...

"g4" wrote


How did you like reading about Sam Sloan's muzzlement? Must have felt
like a kick in the stomach, eh larry?


I missed this. Can you give me a link or explain what happened please?

TIA

--Duncan

You know, that message most likely was from a fake ... because the real
Sam Sloan seldom (if ever) creates a posting with 1 declarative sentence.
The real one would end by adding a jab at either Beatriz, Grant Perks,
George John, Bruce Draney, Tom Dorsch, et al.



"Duncan Oxley" No@Thanks wrote in message ...
Oh, I read that but I was under the impression that the
poster was one of the Sloan imposters. Is that the real Sloan? LOL these guys
have me completely flummoxed as to who is real and who is a fake. And even
the fakes seem to have fakes. Doh!

--Duncan

"g4" wrote in message ...

"samsloan" wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
Will someone please come up with a new chess scandal.. just to keep
things interesting. It is getting kinda dull around here.

Old Haasie

Sorry, but I have been muzzled.




"Duncan Oxley" No@Thanks wrote in message ...

"g4" wrote


How did you like reading about Sam Sloan's muzzlement? Must have felt
like a kick in the stomach, eh larry?


I missed this. Can you give me a link or explain what happened please?

TIA

--Duncan

COME BACK TO US, GREG!


In truth, I was directly addressing the issue raised by Greg,
who for some reason that nobody can fathom still denies that
he is our beloved Greg. -- Larry Parr

Why is the above any concern of yours? -- g4

Mr. g4 wished to be noticed. He felt ignored.
I am doing my best to notice him.

My primary concern, as always, is the argument
rather than the man. But in this instance, Mr.
Kennedy made his person the argument. I responded.

Greg Kennedy as help bot does not wish to be
called Greg Kennedy. I then addressed the issue of
why Greg does not wish to be known as Greg. The g4
anonymouse then accused me of discussing the man
rather than the argument.

Nonsense.

In this instance, the man was the argument. Greg
does not wish to be called by his real name, and I
addressed why such is so. He appeared here before
under Greg Kennedy and nomorechess.

Our g4, who keeps speculating about the identity of
jr, then asks why the matter is any of my business.

The answer: because Greg brought up the subject in an
adversarial proceeding. I addressed said subject, which in
this instance, once again, happened to be -- by Greg's own
choosing -- his person.



g4 wrote:
wrote in message ups.com...
COME BACK TO US, GREG!

As an aside, I suppose the real reason why parr
ignores me is because he don't know **** about me ...
and thus cannot attack my person when (not if, but
when) he loses the intellectual side of an argument.
-- g4 (formerly say no to g4)

Dear g4,

I apologize for ignoring you. I guess your comment
calls for a claim by me to be rolling on the floor and laughing.


Well, I'm glad to hear you got a good laugh out of my comment ...
particularly since you most likely haven't had much to laugh about
recently.

How did you like reading about Sam Sloan's muzzlement? Must have felt
like a kick in the stomach, eh larry?



For the record, Greg Kennedy (aka help bot) was complaining
about being called Greg Kennedy. That was the issue.


You seem to be focused too much on bringing down the messenger
rather than defeating the message. Reading through some of your messages
from years past, you often pointed out to your readers (as if we needed
pointing out) that you dealt with the message and left the messenger's
person out of the discussion. But that was when you were doing battle
with weakies such as Rolf Tuechen, Gilbert Palmer, Jerome Bibuld, to
name a few. (sometimes I wonder if you made up those characters and
were essentially arguing with yourself.) But today, you have stronger
competition ... and IMO you're not faring so well ... and thus you've taken
to attaking people.



My
response was to address why Greg does not wish to be known
under that name on this newsgroup. In truth, I was directly
addressing the issue raised by Greg, who for some reason
that nobody can fathom still denies that he is our beloved Greg.


Why is the above any concern of yours?

wrote in message ups.com...

Mr. g4 wished to be noticed. He felt ignored.
I am doing my best to notice him.


At the risk of sounding like Kevin Bachler, I never said that I wish to
be noticed ... or feeling ignored. I merely speculated as to why you
do not answer my posts. You are free to ignore them if you wish.
And I am free to draw my own conclusions from your silence.



My primary concern, as always, is the argument
rather than the man. But in this instance, Mr.
Kennedy made his person the argument. I responded.

Greg Kennedy as help bot does not wish to be
called Greg Kennedy. I then addressed the issue of
why Greg does not wish to be known as Greg. The g4
anonymouse then accused me of discussing the man
rather than the argument.


A goodly marjority of your posts recently discuss the man
rather than the argument.


Nonsense.

In this instance, the man was the argument. Greg
does not wish to be called by his real name, and I
addressed why such is so. He appeared here before
under Greg Kennedy and nomorechess.

Our g4, who keeps speculating about the identity of
jr, then asks why the matter is any of my business.

The answer: because Greg brought up the subject in an
adversarial proceeding. I addressed said subject, which in
this instance, once again, happened to be -- by Greg's own
choosing -- his person.


Adversarial proceeding? Jeez larry, you make it sound like a trial.
This is a chess newsgroup, for Pete's sake. You do have a tendency
to blow up issues (or nonissues) way out of proportion.

One solution here is, if you have something to say, post the same thing
on your website, and then post it here, linking to the identical text
on your website, so either the poster hacked into your website to post
it there, or it's yours. In sci.crypt they use PGP signatures.

Tom Alciere
http://ChessLinks.info


g4 wrote:
You know, that message most likely was from a fake ... because the real
Sam Sloan seldom (if ever) creates a posting with 1 declarative sentence.
The real one would end by adding a jab at either Beatriz, Grant Perks,
George John, Bruce Draney, Tom Dorsch, et al.



"Duncan Oxley" No@Thanks wrote in message ...
Oh, I read that but I was under the impression that the
poster was one of the Sloan imposters. Is that the real Sloan? LOL these guys
have me completely flummoxed as to who is real and who is a fake. And even
the fakes seem to have fakes. Doh!

--Duncan

"g4" wrote in message ...

"samsloan" wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
Will someone please come up with a new chess scandal.. just to keep
things interesting. It is getting kinda dull around here.

Old Haasie

Sorry, but I have been muzzled.




"Duncan Oxley" No@Thanks wrote in message ...

"g4" wrote


How did you like reading about Sam Sloan's muzzlement? Must have felt
like a kick in the stomach, eh larry?


I missed this. Can you give me a link or explain what happened please?

TIA

--Duncan

Larry Parr wrote (3 Sep 2006 00:03:40 -0700):
7 ... For the record, Greg Kennedy (aka help bot) was complaining
7 about being called Greg Kennedy. That was the issue. My
7 response was to address why Greg does not wish to be known
7 under that name on this newsgroup. In truth, I was directly
7 addressing the issue raised by Greg, who for some reason
7 that nobody can fathom still denies that he is our beloved Greg.
_
g4 wrote (Sun, 3 Sep 2006 10:10:44 -0400):
7 ... Why is the above any concern of yours?

_
Larry Parr wrote (3 Sep 2006 18:39:54 -0700):

7 ... because Greg brought up the subject in an adversarial
7 proceeding. I addressed said subject, which in this instance,
7 once again, happened to be -- by Greg's own choosing -- his
7 person.

_
It seems to me that, in this thread, it was Nick who (incidentally)
raised the subject of the identity of helpbot.
_
"Greg Kennedy (aka 'help bot') wrote: ..." - Nick
(30 Aug 2006 11:21:50 -0700)
_
The main subject, in Nick's note, in the notes immediately
before Nick's, and in helpbot's response to Nick, was:
_
"... To what extent, if any, should the term 'chess Nazi'
be considered inappropriate or offensive? ..." - Nick
(29 Aug 2006 15:47:04 -0700)

Louis Blair wrote:
Larry Parr wrote (3 Sep 2006 00:03:40 -0700):
7 ... For the record, Greg Kennedy (aka help bot) was complaining
7 about being called Greg Kennedy. That was the issue. My
7 response was to address why Greg does not wish to be known
7 under that name on this newsgroup. In truth, I was directly
7 addressing the issue raised by Greg, who for some reason
7 that nobody can fathom still denies that he is our beloved Greg.
_
g4 wrote (Sun, 3 Sep 2006 10:10:44 -0400):
7 ... Why is the above any concern of yours?

_
Larry Parr wrote (3 Sep 2006 18:39:54 -0700):

7 ... because Greg brought up the subject in an adversarial
7 proceeding. I addressed said subject, which in this instance,
7 once again, happened to be -- by Greg's own choosing -- his
7 person.

_
It seems to me that, in this thread, it was Nick who (incidentally)
raised the subject of the identity of helpbot.
_
"Greg Kennedy (aka 'help bot') wrote: ..." - Nick
(30 Aug 2006 11:21:50 -0700)
_
The main subject, in Nick's note, in the notes immediately
before Nick's, and in helpbot's response to Nick, was:
_
"... To what extent, if any, should the term 'chess Nazi'
be considered inappropriate or offensive? ..." - Nick
(29 Aug 2006 15:47:04 -0700)


If I follow Larry Parr's logic correctly, then this Nick
Bourbaki must in reality be Greg Kennedy, posting
under a pseudonym "in praise of" himself. Yes, yes --
it's all beginning to make sense now.

-- help bot

I call for the Chess Fachists to simply begin their own group and leave
the
rest of us to think and breath free, unimcumbered under the iron fists
of their ridicule and persicutions for our opinions and ideas.


I dare say they know who they are and should they go unnamed? One is
the initiator of the "Pledge" against Mr. Inness.
Rob

Rob wrote:
I call for the Chess Fachists to simply begin their own group and leave
the rest of us to think and breath free, unimcumbered under the iron fists
of their ridicule and persicutions for our opinions and ideas.

Rob, one of the distinguishing characteristics of fascism is that
under it, the publication of factual truth is suppressed in favor of
propaganda. Lies, half-truths, fabrications and slanders that serve the
interest of the ruling party are advanced at the expense of the
public's right to factual information.
Another typical fascist ploy is that normal definitions are stood on
their heads, e.g. "War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is
strength" (Orwell). The way you use such terms as "free," "persicution"
[sic] and "iron fist" above indicates you may unwittingly be falling
into that manner of speech, something I'm sure you will want to avoid.


I dare say they know who they are and should they go unnamed? One is
the initiator of the "Pledge" against Mr. Inness.

Seriously, Rob, ask yourself: who here acts more like a fascist-style
propaganda ministry: Innes, Parr, Sloan et al, or those who try here to
counter their habitual falsehoods?