It makes me feel good when Sam is on the opposite of an issue than I am,
because it makes me relatively certain that my opinions and views are
probably siding towards the ethical and right thing to do.

When Sam says my views are crazy, it is a pretty good indicator that his
views which are the opposite of whatever my views are, are the crazy
ones, and mine are probably pointed in the general right direction.

In that sense, Sam serves a valuable purpose. He serves as an excellent
inverse moral compass. If Sam says someone is a liar a cheat and is
horrible, it probably means they are generally honest, trustworthy and a
very nice person.

On the other hand, beware, for if Sam claims that you are a great person
with wonderful ideas, you might want to rethink your position. The only
thing that occasionally scares me is that Sam and I agree on the adult
dues issue. This might be attributable to the previously mentioned
"every squirrel finds an occasional acorn" or "even a stopped clock is
right twice a day" postulates, but it does frighten me.

Best Regards,

Bruce

Every compass points south in all directions from the north pole, then
Bruce?


"Bruce Draney" wrote in message
...
It makes me feel good when Sam is on the opposite of an issue than I am,
because it makes me relatively certain that my opinions and views are
probably siding towards the ethical and right thing to do.

When Sam says my views are crazy, it is a pretty good indicator that his
views which are the opposite of whatever my views are, are the crazy
ones, and mine are probably pointed in the general right direction.

In that sense, Sam serves a valuable purpose. He serves as an excellent
inverse moral compass. If Sam says someone is a liar a cheat and is
horrible, it probably means they are generally honest, trustworthy and a
very nice person.

On the other hand, beware, for if Sam claims that you are a great person
with wonderful ideas, you might want to rethink your position. The only
thing that occasionally scares me is that Sam and I agree on the adult
dues issue. This might be attributable to the previously mentioned
"every squirrel finds an occasional acorn" or "even a stopped clock is
right twice a day" postulates, but it does frighten me.

Best Regards,

Bruce

Every compass points south in all directions from the north pole, then
Bruce?

A bear walks by, what color is it?

..
Every compass points south in all directions from the north pole, then
Bruce?


From the north pole, a compass should point toward eastern Canada, wherein
lies buried a huge iron-ore deposit. The opposite direction ("south") would be
what -- Siberia?

This far north, you have to rely on the North Star, which isn't really north,
either. Heck, here comes somebody now -- let's just ask him....





A bear walks by, what color is it?


White, with blood-red stains around the mouth from having just finished
another satisfying meal of fun-to-chase humans. Not to worry, though -- THAT
bear is has just eaten, and is not going to be a threat until well after you
have have already frozen to death!


Always stay-on the bri-ight si-ide of life!
Dad-um, da-da-da-da-dum.

"Bruce Draney" wrote in message
...
It makes me feel good when Sam is on the opposite of an issue than I am,
because it makes me relatively certain that my opinions and views are
probably siding towards the ethical and right thing to do.

I wouldn't be so sure about that.

When Sam says my views are crazy, it is a pretty good indicator that his
views which are the opposite of whatever my views are, are the crazy
ones, and mine are probably pointed in the general right direction.

But you should evaluate on a case-by-case basis.

In that sense, Sam serves a valuable purpose. He serves as an excellent
inverse moral compass. If Sam says someone is a liar a cheat and is
horrible, it probably means they are generally honest, trustworthy and a
very nice person.

Not at all. There are a number of persons who Sloan dislikes that are not
known for honesty. Tom Klem and Richard Peterson come to mind.

On the other hand, beware, for if Sam claims that you are a great person
with wonderful ideas, you might want to rethink your position.

Why? Does the truth become less truthful if a liar sees the light?

The only
thing that occasionally scares me is that Sam and I agree on the adult
dues issue. This might be attributable to the previously mentioned
"every squirrel finds an occasional acorn" or "even a stopped clock is
right twice a day" postulates, but it does frighten me.
Best Regards,
Bruce

Merry Christmas, Bruce.

Not at all. There are a number of persons who Sloan dislikes that are not
known for honesty. Tom Klem and Richard Peterson come to mind.


And there are a number of people who are mindless idiots who don't know what
they are talking about.
Your name springs to mind.

Are you such a total idiot and such a blind swinger that you attack someone
like Tom Klem who is so often right on. What dishonesty did Tom Klem ever do?
You don't even know the man.

The truth of my battles with USCF are all in the documents. That is why the
USCF side never mentions the documents. Talk aside, politics aside, the
documents are the proof. That is where their lies are revealed.
That liars and distant bullies (like you) call me and others dishonest is more
confirmation of Bruce's principle.
The more liars like you rag on, the more likely it is that we are on the right
side.

Now I realize you are just venting because Santa only left you coal in your
stocking, but try to have a merry christmas anyway.

Richard Peterson

"ASCACHESS" wrote in message
...
Not at all. There are a number of persons who Sloan dislikes that are not
known for honesty. Tom Klem and Richard Peterson come to mind.

And there are a number of people who are mindless idiots who don't know
what
they are talking about.
Your name springs to mind.
Are you such a total idiot and such a blind swinger that you attack
someone
like Tom Klem who is so often right on. What dishonesty did Tom Klem ever
do?

Search Google. I'm too tired to recite it all again.

You don't even know the man.

Not relevent.

Snip Richard's attempt to divert conversation to his war against USCF.

Now I realize you are just venting because Santa only left you coal in
your
stocking, but try to have a merry christmas anyway.
Richard Peterson

You too, Richard. Please try to reform and become a good man.

On Thu, 25 Dec 2003 15:39:48 GMT, "Neil Brennen"
wrote:


Not at all. There are a number of persons who Sloan dislikes that are not
known for honesty. Tom Klem and Richard Peterson come to mind.

Wait a second. Who says that I dislike either Tom Klem or Richard
Peterson.

Tom Klem often has valuable and useful things to say, as long as he is
not on his "I Love Stan Vaughan" bandwagon. I am convinced that Toim
Klem really does know something about computers, for example.

Richard Peterson also has good points, although it is difficult to
think of one. One noteworthy fact is that he and I both have children
by women from Sri Lanka and we are just about the only native born
Americans who can say that, or at least I have never met another one.

Sam Sloan

Hi Richard,

This newsgroup cannot ever constitute any primary source of information for
me, yet when I read the following and a few other posts from Christmas day,
my eyes fairly googled!

"Neil Brennen" wrote in message
news

"ASCACHESS" wrote in message
...
Not at all. There are a number of persons who Sloan dislikes that are
not
known for honesty. Tom Klem and Richard Peterson come to mind.

It is always interesting to me in a clinical way [though I am no clinician
particularly, preferring other psychological venues] when pronouns are
suppressed. In other words, _who_ does not know whom for honesty? And of
course, what can the intent be of suppressing this most natural part of an
expression?

The cheapness of the shot hardly deserves explanation, yet in the home of
the free and the land of the ....? it does require a statement that this
cultural aspiration is about /potential/ not actuality.

Should comprehension-impaired readers not understand the above reference, it
cites what is yellow [like ****] and what is gold.

And there are a number of people who are mindless idiots who don't know
what
they are talking about.
Your name springs to mind.
Are you such a total idiot and such a blind swinger that you attack
someone
like Tom Klem who is so often right on. What dishonesty did Tom Klem
ever
do?

Search Google. I'm too tired to recite it all again.

It is interesting that you, me, Tom Klem, Tim Hanke, "Liarry Parr" and [I'm
not keeping any particular count] George M, JohnF, and Uncle TomCobbley are
all famous liars! [Sorry, dear reader, if I have forgotten your own case].
We are all liars without any proof necessary whatsoever that we lie. The
writer is apparently a recent chess-player and also an historian, although
having english as a first language I do not understand the American use of
this term for these cases.

You don't even know the man.

Not relevent.

A Statement of the writer's maturity. In fact when no one could cite
anything illegal [particularly pedaphilic] about Sam Sloan's site, this
individual still thought he should be persecuted in a post which, apropos of
nothing, equated sex with 'filth.'

Snip Richard's attempt to divert conversation to his war against USCF.

Now I realize you are just venting because Santa only left you coal in
your
stocking, but try to have a merry christmas anyway.
Richard Peterson

You too, Richard. Please try to reform and become a good man.

I was amazed that this writer on Christmas Day (!) took the opportunity to
post something I wrote in a Shakespearean Newsgroup (!) to this one,
deliberately supressing the specific context of his own understanding of it,
in order I suppose, to vent his spleen in the only way such an ignoramous
can.

My only difference with the psychologist Rolf Tueschen who has observed this
type of behavior especially of some chess players on usenet, is that in this
case he thinks this behavior may be electional, whereas I see it as
[emotionally] compulsive. (I do not assert absolutely I am right, but I
submit it is more than interesting to suggest this possibility)

I wonder that anyone can take this person's posts seriously, and, in living
memory, cannot remember any substantive contribution he has made to either
Caissa or Shakespeare! It is a fact that some writers do not contend with
these issues, in case they too are similarly dogged [stalked]. (I myself
would think it complimentary if the critique was of sufficient interest to
develop the topic, alas not!)

It might become a sort of honour thing - you know- to be stalked and
mistreated by such a person. What name should this have... Brenning?
Browning? To be 'browned'. Some ****ty colour, anyway.

I would be interested, Richard, from within your adult opinion of such
things, to understand from you if these types of writers could conceivably
reduce any person?

Cordially, Phil Innes

I would be interested, Richard, from within your adult opinion of such
things, to understand from you if these types of writers could conceivably
reduce any person?

Cordially, Phil Innes


Could they reduce any person?
I am afraid the answer is yes.
Oh, probably not in person as I have a pretty good idea of the value of their
opinions, but when they spew forth, the newbies could be influenced.
In Neil's case, he attacks everyone, usually blindly, inevitably inaccurately.
He is a virtual Vince Lombardi without any success to go with it. When one of
Lombardi's black linemen was asked if Lombardi treated blacks well, he smiled
and said Lombardi treats everyone like dirt.

So it goes.
Neil has joined Sloan in the eternal quest for self attention.

Bill Brock and Ron Suarez are another case indeed. They are mouthpieces for a
particular cause who will throw mud without ever being specific about the
causation. There is some reference to dishonesty without any specifics because
there aren't any to be found.

The crime seems to be catching USCF stealing, being specific about it, filing
documents to back it up, but being a horrible person for tearing down the USCF,
as if USCF could do no wrong.
It is as if the USCF had cornered the world market on papal indulgences and
seem determined to use those indulgences to their limit.

Yet call out Mr. Camaratta for his obvious conflicts of interest and they will
accuse you of slinging mud on an honest man. My dinner riseth.

Time will tell what time will tell.
When the doors close, let us hope these fine individuals will have the decency
to admit their roles, but I would not count on that.

Richard Peterson