On Jan 10, 11:17*am, samsloan wrote:
Eric Johnson, former Acting USCF Executive Director, has posted an
excellent critique on Louis Blair.

It strikes me as weak at best.
Sam, it is hopeless with Mr. Blair. *He likes to argue that all he
does is make the facts known to the decision-makers -- he doesn't ask
them to do anything.

Thus, if he writes to a Wikipedia official and points out things that
would/could/should get a listing deleted -- all he says he is doing is
making Wikipedia "aware" of the situation. *When Wikipedia takes the
obvious step, Mr. Blair thinks he has clean hands.

Sort of like saying "all I did was yell fire -- I didn't ask anyone to
stampede the door -- that was their own decision."

But pointing out the facts or "making them known" means there is a
fire. Thus, a warning is appropriate.

On Jan 10, 9:21 am, "Chess One" wrote:

The proper whiskey runs through 30 miles of bracken-bog with hopefully and
least one decaying sheep in it, then passes by numerous dungyards, before
crossing a burnt heather-moor.

Ah-- a sheep herder! I thought I smelled something
foul. Better keep yer sheep away from my cow
pasture, or there'll be Hell to pay.


Jack Daniels tastes like it ran through Detroit.

Is that in Kentucky? Come to think of it, the
Ohio river could have been contaminated from
that far off, with all this rain.


Perhaps someone will now write in to tell us that, in their language the
chess pieces themselves are altogether masculine, neuter, or feminine - or,
given any group of pieces containing one masculine piece, they are all
masculine, but if the queen alone is referenced, she is permitted to be
feminine.

Indeed, I wonder if there are male pieces and female pieces, and also
neutral ones? In English we must make do with the King being masculine, the
Queen being feminine - the bishops, knights and rooks being don't-knows.

Generally speaking, Knights are males, Rooks
can be of either sex (elephants) or sexless (turrets),
while Bishops as we know are mainly pedophiles.


But what of the pawns? They are so often portrayed as little [male]
soldiers - but on the cusp of the seventh rank can undergo a gender change
to become wimmin!

A titanic promotion, so I'm told; not only from
the inferior sex to the better one, but there is
too, a simultaneous large gain in intelligence.


The first serious chess historian of the modern game, a Gent named Hyde, who
later helped found the Royal Society - actually thought this gender changing
ridiculous! Immoral! Insufferable! - and sought to ban the Queen!

This tells volumes about Mr. Hyde's "issues",
but who really cares what such fools thought?
At one time, folks thought that lightning came
from an Arnold Swarzenneger-type fellow tossing
bolts down from the heavens.


They should all be blokes, [I paraphrase] saith he, since chess is a war
game and women have no part in it!

Are you nuts? Take the battle of Troy, for
instance. Do you believe for one second that
Helen had no part? That it was just about
money and power? Or take WWII: the women
in Japan trained to fend off an impending
invasion by the USA, while women here
worked in factories to make guns and ammo.
And what about the female nurses? What
point is there in getting wounded, if not for
them? That guy simply didn't understand
what war is all about.


Dammit! He continued, soon we will see a WGM named Martha Stewart, or
something, who will be out there stencilling the chess board with pretty
flower patterns! Of course, there are pretty flowers on a battle field,
but...

Where have all the flowers gone?

Where have all the young girls gone?

Where have all the young men gone?

Where have all the soldiers gone?

Where have all the graveyards gone?

Where have all the flowers gone?


and in his confusion abandoned his metaphor completely, and so the Queen
survived, checking happily into the future.

Isn't this a lovely story for the New Year?

It would make for a good story, but who is
going to "buy" the idea that this one person
had the power to decide the Queen's fate?


Obviously, the accusation: "what is it you did do,
Loueiee?" means nothing whatever to a newbie, apart
from just what it says (and the proof of poor spelling
skills). I just want to raise the bar off the ground; I'm
not aiming for perfection here... .

should one hurdle the bar or do that other thing underneath it, and hope
your pants don't split?

Same problem he last year's pants keep
getting smaller, and tighter! I have coats that
won't zip, shirts that have shrunk up in the
midsection, and belts that must be used two
at a time. Try placing the bar six inches off
the ground, and then stumble over the top,
doing a Fosbury flop with your feet at the end.
Oh-- don't try this on cement!


-- help bot

"help bot" wrote in message
...
On Jan 10, 9:21 am, "Chess One" wrote:

Jack Daniels tastes like it ran through Detroit.

Is that in Kentucky?

No, its in Canada, and from the Old French, De troité, meaning 'the trots'.


Indeed, I wonder if there are male pieces and female pieces, and also
neutral ones? In English we must make do with the King being masculine,
the
Queen being feminine - the bishops, knights and rooks being don't-knows.

Generally speaking, Knights are males, Rooks
can be of either sex (elephants) or sexless (turrets),
while Bishops as we know are mainly pedophiles.

In consideration of the above, Rooks should be replaced by something clearly
more indeterminate and therefore scientific [see chess ratings thread], like
single-celled amoeba [which will look like big fried eggs], I suppose
Knights are still all blokes, though these days down at Smith College, there
may well be some gender-busters. I expect they would want to be called
Nighties?

The difficulty is with the Bishops, which I think are still all white
males - itself the worst combination of things. And I can't think of how to
fix them - so conclude they gotta go.

What do we replace them with? After several seconds of thinking, the only
item popping into my mind are Elvises. You could have a pair of Elvises,
with guitars of course [Fenders] - apart from the drugs he was pretty clean,
cleaner than bishops, anyhow.

Maybe other readers have better ideas?

But what of the pawns? They are so often portrayed as little [male]
soldiers - but on the cusp of the seventh rank can undergo a gender
change
to become wimmin!

A titanic promotion, so I'm told; not only from
the inferior sex to the better one, but there is
too, a simultaneous large gain in intelligence.

True. Look at all us men writing here! pfft! Dumber 'n 2 short planks. And
our collective wit can't entrance a single wimmin to write here, or not for
more than 10 minutes at a time. Course not everyone here likes wimmin, and a
few don't know what they are. Even so... you would think we would have some
sort of attractive possibilities, no?

Maybe we have bad feng shui?

The first serious chess historian of the modern game, a Gent named Hyde,
who
later helped found the Royal Society - actually thought this gender
changing
ridiculous! Immoral! Insufferable! - and sought to ban the Queen!

This tells volumes about Mr. Hyde's "issues",
but who really cares what such fools thought?

He was not atypical of his times. England had just got rid of a real queen
who died from death, and men were breaking out again! I know Hillary just
won New Hampshire, but, can you imagine listening to her voice for 30 years?
(

At one time, folks thought that lightning came
from an Arnold Swarzenneger-type fellow tossing
bolts down from the heavens.

Thank you for sharing, but I hardly see the relevance to the Bishop problem.
Unless you are suggesting Swarzenneggers instead of Elvises?

curs some boring comments

Dammit! He continued, soon we will see a WGM named Martha Stewart, or
something, who will be out there stencilling the chess board with pretty
flower patterns! Of course, there are pretty flowers on a battle field,
but...

Where have all the flowers gone?

Where have all the young girls gone?

Where have all the young men gone?

Where have all the soldiers gone?

Where have all the graveyards gone?

Where have all the flowers gone?

That's very lovely, Greg.

and in his confusion abandoned his metaphor completely, and so the Queen
survived, checking happily into the future.

Isn't this a lovely story for the New Year?

It would make for a good story, but who is
going to "buy" the idea that this one person
had the power to decide the Queen's fate?

All men? But you digress: unless anyone else comes up with a new name for
the Bishop, then we could have a vote for Swarzenneggers instead of
Elvises - which is dumb, but very practical [see ratings threads again], and
people can enjoy pretending to be stupid by acutally voting, whereas, as we
discussed, we know they are dumb anyway. You see the perfectly poised logic
of my dissertation?

Obviously, the accusation: "what is it you did do,
Loueiee?" means nothing whatever to a newbie, apart
from just what it says (and the proof of poor spelling
skills). I just want to raise the bar off the ground; I'm
not aiming for perfection here... .

should one hurdle the bar or do that other thing underneath it, and hope
your pants don't split?

Same problem he last year's pants keep
getting smaller, and tighter! I have coats that
won't zip, shirts that have shrunk up in the
midsection, and belts that must be used two
at a time. Try placing the bar six inches off
the ground, and then stumble over the top,
doing a Fosbury flop with your feet at the end.
Oh-- don't try this on cement!

We have no cement on the farm; in order to sell organic free-range gerbils
you had to be cement-free by 2003. Same is true of hamster-ranches
throughout Vermont.

Phil Innes

-- help bot