Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old November 3rd 07, 02:47 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,931
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Oct 31, 1:19 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:
With all this lawsuit business and whatnot, I am curious how Mr. Sloan
can help improve the state of chess. Mr. Sloan, can you speak up
please?


We're still waiting for Sam to reply to Mr. Hutnik, the original
poster. So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago. He has thereby
provided nothing but support for my view, that he has no genuine
interest in improving chess, only in slinging mud. I'd say that if he
ever had any chance to get Mr. Hutnik's vote, he's lost it now.

  #2   Report Post  
Old November 3rd 07, 06:19 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:

So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago.


I see. Does that mean that you are claiming that you were at one time
a 2300+ player?

Sam Sloan


  #3   Report Post  
Old November 3rd 07, 07:49 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,931
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 3, 2:19 pm, samsloan wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:

So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago.


I see. Does that mean that you are claiming that you were at one time
a 2300+ player?


Sam, you are so tedious. All this was dealt with here years ago.
Since learning that the correct Harkness-to-Elo conversion for my
peak postal rating of 1806, back in 1986, was around 2260-2270 Elo,
rather than 2306 as I previously thought, I don't claim now to have
been 2300+. But I was pretty close. That I was officialy of Master
rank and #45 in the USCF postal rankings is a matter of public record.
Eat your heart out.
Now, Sam, I suggest that if you are genuinely interested in helping
the cause of chess, you quit wasting people's time re-asking questions
that were answered years ago. Instead, answer the question Mr. Hutnik
posed. But you won't do that, will you? Because you are totally
negative, not the least bit positive. You haven't the least idea how
to help chess, nor the least intention of doing so.

I can only thank you for so thoroughly demonstrating how accurate I
was in giving Mr. Hutnik such a negative report on you.

  #4   Report Post  
Old November 4th 07, 04:16 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 140
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Oct 31, 1:19 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:

With all this lawsuit business and whatnot, I am curious how Mr. Sloan
can help improve the state of chess. Mr. Sloan, can you speak up
please?


We're still waiting for Sam to reply to Mr. Hutnik, the original
poster. So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago. He has thereby
provided nothing but support for my view, that he has no genuine
interest in improving chess, only in slinging mud. I'd say that if he
ever had any chance to get Mr. Hutnik's vote, he's lost it now.


Considering I sent Mr. Sloan two emails in September, before running
across this All Sloan All the Time newsgroup(s), and he never wrote me
back, I wouldn't be surpised Mr. Sloan ignored my question, which is
why it was phrased in the third-person and not addressed to him.

- Rich

  #5   Report Post  
Old November 4th 07, 09:03 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 14,870
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 3, 11:16 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:
On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:

On Oct 31, 1:19 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:


With all this lawsuit business and whatnot, I am curious how Mr. Sloan
can help improve the state of chess. Mr. Sloan, can you speak up
please?


We're still waiting for Sam to reply to Mr. Hutnik, the original
poster. So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago. He has thereby
provided nothing but support for my view, that he has no genuine
interest in improving chess, only in slinging mud. I'd say that if he
ever had any chance to get Mr. Hutnik's vote, he's lost it now.


Considering I sent Mr. Sloan two emails in September, before running
across this All Sloan All the Time newsgroup(s), and he never wrote me
back, I wouldn't be surpised Mr. Sloan ignored my question, which is
why it was phrased in the third-person and not addressed to him.

- Rich


I do not recall ever receiving an email from you.

I get more than one thousand emails per day and I do not read all of
them.

Sam Sloan



  #6   Report Post  
Old November 4th 07, 04:05 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,931
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 4, 4:03 am, samsloan wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:16 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:





On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:


On Oct 31, 1:19 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:


With all this lawsuit business and whatnot, I am curious how Mr. Sloan
can help improve the state of chess. Mr. Sloan, can you speak up
please?


We're still waiting for Sam to reply to Mr. Hutnik, the original
poster. So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago. He has thereby
provided nothing but support for my view, that he has no genuine
interest in improving chess, only in slinging mud. I'd say that if he
ever had any chance to get Mr. Hutnik's vote, he's lost it now.


Considering I sent Mr. Sloan two emails in September, before running
across this All Sloan All the Time newsgroup(s), and he never wrote me
back, I wouldn't be surpised Mr. Sloan ignored my question, which is
why it was phrased in the third-person and not addressed to him.


- Rich


I do not recall ever receiving an email from you.

I get more than one thousand emails per day and I do not read all of
them.


Sam, you can eliminate all the porn-site come-ons and male-
enlargement ads with a good spam filter. You should then be able to
handle with ease the few remaining messages, if in fact there still
are any.

  #7   Report Post  
Old November 4th 07, 08:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 140
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 4, 4:03 am, samsloan wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:16 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:



On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:


On Oct 31, 1:19 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:


With all this lawsuit business and whatnot, I am curious how Mr. Sloan
can help improve the state of chess. Mr. Sloan, can you speak up
please?


We're still waiting for Sam to reply to Mr. Hutnik, the original
poster. So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago. He has thereby
provided nothing but support for my view, that he has no genuine
interest in improving chess, only in slinging mud. I'd say that if he
ever had any chance to get Mr. Hutnik's vote, he's lost it now.


Considering I sent Mr. Sloan two emails in September, before running
across this All Sloan All the Time newsgroup(s), and he never wrote me
back, I wouldn't be surpised Mr. Sloan ignored my question, which is
why it was phrased in the third-person and not addressed to him.


- Rich


I do not recall ever receiving an email from you.

I get more than one thousand emails per day and I do not read all of
them.

Sam Sloan


I emailed and email address at ishipress.com, which might explain it.
It was the only email address I found related to you. Ok, that is
understandable. I am not going to post it here now.

Anyhow, I posted my question so maybe you could speak out for yourself
on why you want to smack down the U.S Chess Federation, Polger and so
on, and to what end. I am curious what your motives are and so on, as
your messages are dominating a newsgroup, and all it appears to be is
a ****ing contest by an irate individual to accomplish selfish ends to
me. I don't see how the cause of chess is advanced in any way here,
which is why I ask.

- Rich

  #8   Report Post  
Old November 4th 07, 09:38 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Aug 2007
Posts: 146
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 4, 12:29 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:
On Nov 4, 4:03 am, samsloan wrote:



On Nov 3, 11:16 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:


On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:


On Oct 31, 1:19 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:


With all this lawsuit business and whatnot, I am curious how Mr. Sloan
can help improve the state of chess. Mr. Sloan, can you speak up
please?


We're still waiting for Sam to reply to Mr. Hutnik, the original
poster. So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago. He has thereby
provided nothing but support for my view, that he has no genuine
interest in improving chess, only in slinging mud. I'd say that if he
ever had any chance to get Mr. Hutnik's vote, he's lost it now.


Considering I sent Mr. Sloan two emails in September, before running
across this All Sloan All the Time newsgroup(s), and he never wrote me
back, I wouldn't be surpised Mr. Sloan ignored my question, which is
why it was phrased in the third-person and not addressed to him.


- Rich


I do not recall ever receiving an email from you.


I get more than one thousand emails per day and I do not read all of
them.


Sam Sloan


I emailed and email address at ishipress.com, which might explain it.
It was the only email address I found related to you. Ok, that is
understandable. I am not going to post it here now.

Anyhow, I posted my question so maybe you could speak out for yourself
on why you want to smack down the U.S Chess Federation, Polger and so
on, and to what end. I am curious what your motives are and so on, as
your messages are dominating a newsgroup, and all it appears to be is
a ****ing contest by an irate individual to accomplish selfish ends to
me. I don't see how the cause of chess is advanced in any way here,
which is why I ask.

- Rich


Mr. Hutnick,

Your use of the phrase "cause of chess" I find rather curious. What
is this cause? How does it relate to Mr and Mrs. Truong and the
USCF? Surely you do not mean cause in the sense of cause and effect.
It sounds more like you mean it like it was justification for some
sort of crusade? Clarify, if you will, please. What is the "cause of
chess?"

Cheers,
Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.

  #9   Report Post  
Old November 5th 07, 11:36 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 5,003
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?


"Rich Hutnik" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Nov 4, 4:03 am, samsloan wrote:
On Nov 3, 11:16 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:



I do not recall ever receiving an email from you.

I get more than one thousand emails per day and I do not read all of
them.


1,000? is that really credible? I get about 200, and maybe 50 of those are
e-mail notification of correspondance moves.

Sam Sloan


I emailed and email address at ishipress.com, which might explain it.
It was the only email address I found related to you. Ok, that is
understandable. I am not going to post it here now.

Anyhow, I posted my question so maybe you could speak out for yourself
on why you want to smack down the U.S Chess Federation, Polger and so
on, and to what end. I am curious what your motives are and so on, as
your messages are dominating a newsgroup, and all it appears to be is
a ****ing contest by an irate individual to accomplish selfish ends to
me. I don't see how the cause of chess is advanced in any way here,
which is why I ask.


I see even Taylor Kingston uses my Joe MacCarthy description of such
'questions'. What happens is that, to take an example, Sam Sloan will exite
the issue 2 months before the election of Polgar and Truong taking over the
federation, getting their hands on the money, and spening it on some looney
marketing idea - 2 months after the election he is miffed that they seem to
have made no resolutions at all, especially not making a grab for 'the
money'.

As many say here, whether in respect of Sloan or others, what has this to do
with chess players rather than chess politicians? And maybe it has, though
on the evidence of what is presented, not clearly anything of value is even
suggested, which survives a post or two.

Politicos are often too proud to attend to any chess public's values - even
to the extent of being able to sensibly repeat them. Exceptions are those
who do engage in interactive forums, and those people are... as far as I can
see, Polgar, Truong and Sloan. If only Sloan didn't make it all about him,
then during his board tenure he may have actually have been able to do
something other than raise a rash of alarums on his own behalf, to which he
resolved none. Randy Bauer used to write here, but relied too much on
running on his record rather than asking open questions about what aids us
or sets us back.

To return to the center of this topic, what did Sam Sloan /do/ to improve
chess that warranted his seat on the board? Of course, this might equitably
be compared with what others achieved during the same period of tenure. To
wit: did he do more than what a non-board member could do, which is /only/
to raise issues, and was he, or others! able to identify which of these
issues was critical, sufficiently to remedy them or take advantage of some
erstwhile absent opportunity?

Phil Innes

- Rich



  #10   Report Post  
Old November 5th 07, 02:53 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 140
Default What will Sam Sloan do to improve chess?

On Nov 4, 4:38 pm, "j.d.walker" wrote:
On Nov 4, 12:29 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:



On Nov 4, 4:03 am, samsloan wrote:


On Nov 3, 11:16 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:


On Nov 3, 10:47 am, Taylor Kingston wrote:


On Oct 31, 1:19 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:


With all this lawsuit business and whatnot, I am curious how Mr. Sloan
can help improve the state of chess. Mr. Sloan, can you speak up
please?


We're still waiting for Sam to reply to Mr. Hutnik, the original
poster. So far in this thread, Sloan has done nothing but dredge up
old ad-hom attacks on me that were refuted years ago. He has thereby
provided nothing but support for my view, that he has no genuine
interest in improving chess, only in slinging mud. I'd say that if he
ever had any chance to get Mr. Hutnik's vote, he's lost it now.


Considering I sent Mr. Sloan two emails in September, before running
across this All Sloan All the Time newsgroup(s), and he never wrote me
back, I wouldn't be surpised Mr. Sloan ignored my question, which is
why it was phrased in the third-person and not addressed to him.


- Rich


I do not recall ever receiving an email from you.


I get more than one thousand emails per day and I do not read all of
them.


Sam Sloan


I emailed and email address at ishipress.com, which might explain it.
It was the only email address I found related to you. Ok, that is
understandable. I am not going to post it here now.


Anyhow, I posted my question so maybe you could speak out for yourself
on why you want to smack down the U.S Chess Federation, Polger and so
on, and to what end. I am curious what your motives are and so on, as
your messages are dominating a newsgroup, and all it appears to be is
a ****ing contest by an irate individual to accomplish selfish ends to
me. I don't see how the cause of chess is advanced in any way here,
which is why I ask.


- Rich


Mr. Hutnick,

Your use of the phrase "cause of chess" I find rather curious. What
is this cause? How does it relate to Mr and Mrs. Truong and the
USCF? Surely you do not mean cause in the sense of cause and effect.
It sounds more like you mean it like it was justification for some
sort of crusade? Clarify, if you will, please. What is the "cause of
chess?"

Cheers,
Rev. J.D. Walker, U.C.


Cause in this case means "purposes", as is seen in the expression
"just cause". What I was asking here is exactly does Mr. Sloan look
to do to improve the status of chess by his actions.

- Rich

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
Chess variants, with computer programs, by Mats Winther Mats Winther rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 0 July 20th 06 06:28 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 April 23rd 06 05:21 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 April 7th 06 05:30 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 December 19th 05 05:36 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 October 19th 05 05:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:24 AM.

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