Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old October 16th 07, 03:34 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 99
Default We Don't Need A Confession

Trolgar has indulged in petty anonymous posting for many years.

Everybody knows it, and now there is clear public evidence.

He denies it? So what? He's ****ing Guilty! We Don't Need A
Confession!

He's like so many junkies who get caught with dope in their pocket but
swear, "that's not mine."

Thank you Trolgar, but your volunteer services are no longer needed.

And please, seek psychiatric help immediately.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Email becomes the electronic equivalent of DNA evidence
http://businessshrink.biz/psychology...-dna-evidence/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

  #2   Report Post  
Old October 16th 07, 04:17 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,576
Default We Don't Need A Confession

On Oct 16, 9:34 am, wrote:
Trolgar has indulged in petty anonymous posting for many years.

Everybody knows it, and now there is clear public evidence.

He denies it? So what? He's ****ing Guilty! We Don't Need A
Confession!

He's like so many junkies who get caught with dope in their pocket but
swear, "that's not mine."

Thank you Trolgar, but your volunteer services are no longer needed.

And please, seek psychiatric help immediately.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Email becomes the electronic equivalent of DNA evidencehttp://businessshrink.biz/psychologyofbusiness/2007/10/15/email-becom...
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


Troung will be fired. On October, 9 ,2007 he flew to Virginia Tech to
serve as a chess role model for the Virginia Tech chess club
trying to help them heal. Paul has also threatened to KILL me. So what
if he sues me?

Marcus Roberts

  #3   Report Post  
Old October 16th 07, 05:39 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 5,003
Default We Don't Need A Confession


wrote in message
oups.com...
Trolgar has indulged in petty anonymous posting for many years.

Everybody knows it, and now there is clear public evidence.

He denies it? So what? He's ****ing Guilty! We Don't Need A
Confession!


This is not a court! Who even needs anything, since we all know...

I mean - Gentlemen - at least don't pretend you even need a court

"Everybody knows it"

He's like so many junkies who get caught with dope in their pocket but
swear, "that's not mine."

Thank you Trolgar, but your volunteer services are no longer needed.

And please, seek psychiatric help immediately.


Gosh! The only difference to a Soviet Tribunal is that the psychaitric
'help' would be both mandatory and punitive.

Are these really Americans that are writing this stuff?

Phil Innes

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Email becomes the electronic equivalent of DNA evidence
http://businessshrink.biz/psychology...-dna-evidence/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=



  #4   Report Post  
Old October 17th 07, 12:36 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,576
Default We Don't Need A Confession

On Oct 16, 11:39 am, "Chess One" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

Trolgar has indulged in petty anonymous posting for many years.


Everybody knows it, and now there is clear public evidence.


He denies it? So what? He's ****ing Guilty! We Don't Need A
Confession!


This is not a court! Who even needs anything, since we all know...

I mean - Gentlemen - at least don't pretend you even need a court

"Everybody knows it"

He's like so many junkies who get caught with dope in their pocket but
swear, "that's not mine."


Thank you Trolgar, but your volunteer services are no longer needed.


And please, seek psychiatric help immediately.


Gosh! The only difference to a Soviet Tribunal is that the psychaitric
'help' would be both mandatory and punitive.

Are these really Americans that are writing this stuff?

Phil Innes



=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Email becomes the electronic equivalent of DNA evidence
http://businessshrink.biz/psychology...15/email-becom...
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Phil

This is more than an American crisis.

I am a dual national. I write in the name of her majesty, Queen
Elizabeth II. So, this is a worldwide chess issue, not an America
Issue. You are right, this is not a court. However, this is a FREE
PRESS, and Paul has gotten has fingers caught in the "cookie
Jar." You have been one of the most liberal people on this forum. Why
do you allow your professional and personal loyalties to appear
to defend criminal conduct?

Mr. Troung is leaving chess politics, for a while. If you really cared
about chess, you would be escorting the EXIT door right now.

If we attack the truthful things you CARE about, then you seem to
defend the criminals, who are married to your ALLIES!

But alas, we all error to be human, and only in the court of public
opinion, do we dare SPEAK THE TRUTH, as free men
and women.

Paul has made war not only on me, but FIDE President Kirsan
Ilyumzhinov. I'll let you figure out what that means to Paul if
he suddenly travels to Chess City, Russia. Paul has endangered his OWN
LIFE. He needs to take a break, why don't you
just accept this.



Sincerely,

Marcus Roberts
Permanent Delegate of St Kitts and Nevis to FIDE

  #5   Report Post  
Old October 17th 07, 12:26 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 5,003
Default We Don't Need A Confession


wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 16, 11:39 am, "Chess One" wrote:



Phil

This is more than an American crisis.

I am a dual national. I write in the name of her majesty, Queen
Elizabeth II. So, this is a worldwide chess issue, not an America
Issue. You are right, this is not a court. However, this is a FREE
PRESS, and Paul has gotten has fingers caught in the "cookie
Jar." You have been one of the most liberal people on this forum. Why
do you allow your professional and personal loyalties to appear
to defend criminal conduct?


marcus, i even wrote in the nytimes that an investigation /should/ continue,
but an open one into the false poster. what i am writing here is that this
is not a court, although people are using it that way for 'fun'

i am not defending criminal conduct! i suggest i am defending criminal
/process/ which means you do not prejudge people to be guilty. this is why i
need psychiatric help, etc.

phil innes




  #6   Report Post  
Old October 18th 07, 02:15 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 71
Default We Don't Need A Confession

On Oct 17, 7:26 am, "Chess One" wrote:
(snipped some stuff from Marcus)

marcus, i even wrote in the nytimes that an investigation /should/ continue,
but an open one into the false poster. what i am writing here is that this
is not a court, although people are using it that way for 'fun'


It is admirable that you wish to pursue this in such a high-minded
fashion.
It is good to keep that point of view in mind. I propose that the
reaction
you receive here, which you [dismissively :-) ] attribute to
purposeful
attempts at running a kangaroo court (which may be close for some
posters), results naturally from the issue's development. Let's hope
I can clarify this. Prior to Truong being associated with the posts,
there was no official energy for finding out about impersonators on
rgcp (or anywhere). This kind of exploration is outside of the uscf's
zone of interest. The uscf's interest precisely and specificly came
about _because_ Truong was associated ('accused') with the behavior.
Thus, uscf's (and largely this group) interest is DIRECTLY whether
or not Truong is the culprit. Your repeated calls for a refocus to
finding
the culprit(s) are not embraced because that's not the 'point'. The
uscf needs/wants to know if these officers have behaved in
ways that could reflect on their suitability for service. Your
approach,
if successful, could do that. However, that is not likely to be the
most efficient, nor effective, approach to answer the question that
most
interests uscf (and those here?). We have a charge. We have some
evidence on both sides (the report, schedules, motives, ...).
Directly
assessing the quality of the evidence for and against the individuals
certainly is another, valid, approach. That is hardly a revolutionary
concept and reflects typical adversarial (court) proceedings. The
energy and focus here seems to be directed twoards this latter
approach
and you shouldn't expect to be congratulated or embraced for pushing
elseways.

i am not defending criminal conduct! i suggest i am defending criminal
/process/ which means you do not prejudge people to be guilty. this is why i
need psychiatric help, etc.

Phil, I've been disappointed in some of the things you point out as
potentially exculpating. I've tried to interpret them more as example
warning flags--that there may be odd circumstances that conspire to
make the innocent look very guilty--and that you recognize that from
an evidentiary point of view, they carry little, or less weight than
some
of the other evidence. One example would be classified as
'testimonials.'
You specifically, and others too, have offered that it is totally out
of
character or inconceivable for him to have done this. This has some
weight, but comparatively little when compared to 'hard' evidence.
[Consider the comments from the neighbors when Joe Normal is
discovered to be a serial killer--"Never suspected" "Such a normal
guy" "Our kids played together all the time." Of course I make no
euqivalence between murder and impersonation but merely point
out that even gross aberrations of behavior can be disguised quite
adequately from the public.] In this current case, we have two
witness
statements that show both of the involved principals have acted in
ways that demonstrate they are willing to distort in some
circumstances
(Truong w.r.t. his title, and the coworker who stated PT said he had a
doctorate; and Polgar with her lie that she did not forward that
message
to anyone other than Bill and Bill [I think]). This observation
further
degrades the quality of the exculpating observations.

It would be easier for me to read, and appreciate, your contributions
if every now and then you made it clear that you aren't evaluating
_quality_ of evidence as you offer alternatives to 'Truong is guilty'.

K

phil innes


  #7   Report Post  
Old October 18th 07, 05:09 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,073
Default We Don't Need A Confession

On Oct 17, 6:26 am, "Chess One" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

On Oct 16, 11:39 am, "Chess One" wrote:
Phil


This is more than an American crisis.


I am a dual national. I write in the name of her majesty, Queen
Elizabeth II. So, this is a worldwide chess issue, not an America
Issue. You are right, this is not a court. However, this is a FREE
PRESS, and Paul has gotten has fingers caught in the "cookie
Jar." You have been one of the most liberal people on this forum. Why
do you allow your professional and personal loyalties to appear
to defend criminal conduct?


marcus, i even wrote in the nytimes


Mr. Innes, of course, means the chess blog of The New York Times. He
didn't write for the paper itself. I'm sure his failing to make that
distinction was an oversight.

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Terrible Confession I Must Make samsloan rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 2 February 11th 07 01:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017