Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 05:10 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 140
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

The amount of stuff Sam is posting here looks real close to being a
possible case of slander/libel, if it doesn't pan out. I am curious
if Sam will be counter-sued here. Anyone have any idea? To
repeatedly dump dirt on someone in a public forum long-term has been
brought into a court of law as part of character defamation cases,
hasn't it?

Just curious here...
- Rich

Yippie, I found a use for the politics newsgroup. I wish posts like
this one would just be contained to it.

  #2   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 05:25 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Aug 2007
Posts: 146
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 9:10 am, Rich Hutnik wrote:
The amount of stuff Sam is posting here looks real close to being a
possible case of slander/libel, if it doesn't pan out. I am curious
if Sam will be counter-sued here. Anyone have any idea? To
repeatedly dump dirt on someone in a public forum long-term has been
brought into a court of law as part of character defamation cases,
hasn't it?

Just curious here...
- Rich

Yippie, I found a use for the politics newsgroup. I wish posts like
this one would just be contained to it.


Welcome to rec.games.chess.politics Rich. Be prepared for a bumpy
ride. If you really want to know about the intentions of Mr. and Mrs.
Truong you will want to contact them elsewhere. I do not believe they
acknowledge participating in this news group.

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

  #3   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 06:25 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,931
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 12:10 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:

The amount of stuff Sam is posting here looks real close to being a
possible case of slander/libel, if it doesn't pan out. I am curious
if Sam will be counter-sued here. Anyone have any idea? To
repeatedly dump dirt on someone in a public forum long-term has been
brought into a court of law as part of character defamation cases,
hasn't it?


Whether guilty of libel or not (and I offer no opinion on that),
Sloan is relatively invulnerable in that regard, I believe, because he
has little or nothing to lose. As far as I know, such offenses are
punishable mainly by fine, not by, say, jail time. (If anyone here is
more knowledgeable in this area of law, feel free to correct me.) If I
understand correctly, Sloan rarely has two nickels to rub together,
figuratively speaking, so a fine, however large, would be meaningless.
Another prolific "chess writer" somewhat like Sloan is James R.A.
Schroeder. I don't recall that Schroeder has ever been especially
litigious, but he always been vituperative to a high degree, freely
tossing insults, accusations and other highly derogatory, inflammatory
and defamatory remarks at grandmasters, editors, historians,
tournament organizers and other chess personages, both major (e.g.
Yasser Seirawan, Tony Miles, Mikhail Botvinnik) and minor (e.g.
myself). Some, perhaps even much, of what he's written has probably
been actionable. But legal action would be futile, like trying to get
blood from a stone.

  #4   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 08:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 248
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 12:25 pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Nov 6, 12:10 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:



The amount of stuff Sam is posting here looks real close to being a
possible case of slander/libel, if it doesn't pan out. I am curious
if Sam will be counter-sued here. Anyone have any idea? To
repeatedly dump dirt on someone in a public forum long-term has been
brought into a court of law as part of character defamation cases,
hasn't it?


Whether guilty of libel or not (and I offer no opinion on that),
Sloan is relatively invulnerable in that regard, I believe, because he
has little or nothing to lose. As far as I know, such offenses are
punishable mainly by fine, not by, say, jail time. (If anyone here is
more knowledgeable in this area of law, feel free to correct me.) If I
understand correctly, Sloan rarely has two nickels to rub together,
figuratively speaking, so a fine, however large, would be meaningless.
Another prolific "chess writer" somewhat like Sloan is James R.A.
Schroeder. I don't recall that Schroeder has ever been especially
litigious, but he always been vituperative to a high degree, freely
tossing insults, accusations and other highly derogatory, inflammatory
and defamatory remarks at grandmasters, editors, historians,
tournament organizers and other chess personages, both major (e.g.
Yasser Seirawan, Tony Miles, Mikhail Botvinnik) and minor (e.g.
myself). Some, perhaps even much, of what he's written has probably
been actionable. But legal action would be futile, like trying to get
blood from a stone.


Oh, how I loved those newletters that Schroeder used to put out. Great
entertainment!
Regards,
zdrakec

  #5   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 09:01 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,931
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 3:29 pm, zdrakec wrote:
On Nov 6, 12:25 pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:





On Nov 6, 12:10 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:


The amount of stuff Sam is posting here looks real close to being a
possible case of slander/libel, if it doesn't pan out. I am curious
if Sam will be counter-sued here. Anyone have any idea? To
repeatedly dump dirt on someone in a public forum long-term has been
brought into a court of law as part of character defamation cases,
hasn't it?


Whether guilty of libel or not (and I offer no opinion on that),
Sloan is relatively invulnerable in that regard, I believe, because he
has little or nothing to lose. As far as I know, such offenses are
punishable mainly by fine, not by, say, jail time. (If anyone here is
more knowledgeable in this area of law, feel free to correct me.) If I
understand correctly, Sloan rarely has two nickels to rub together,
figuratively speaking, so a fine, however large, would be meaningless.
Another prolific "chess writer" somewhat like Sloan is James R.A.
Schroeder. I don't recall that Schroeder has ever been especially
litigious, but he always been vituperative to a high degree, freely
tossing insults, accusations and other highly derogatory, inflammatory
and defamatory remarks at grandmasters, editors, historians,
tournament organizers and other chess personages, both major (e.g.
Yasser Seirawan, Tony Miles, Mikhail Botvinnik) and minor (e.g.
myself). Some, perhaps even much, of what he's written has probably
been actionable. But legal action would be futile, like trying to get
blood from a stone.


Oh, how I loved those newletters that Schroeder used to put out. Great
entertainment!


Those must have been different from the Schroeder material I've
seen, which is several pages of his "Confidential Chess Lessons" plus
a few letters and postcards he sent me. Consisted mainly of him
calling people "moron," "imbecile," "idiot," "stupid" etc. He would
present analytical "refutations" that refuted nothing and "historical
articles" based on anything but fact. He would fault everyone's
spelling and grammar, when in fact he was as qualified to do this as
Ray Charles was to judge paintings. Simply the crude ravings of a
disturbed, toxic mind put into a chess context.



  #6   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 10:13 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,576
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 12:51 pm, "Ted E Bear" wrote:
On 6-Nov-2007, Taylor Kingston wrote:

Whether guilty of libel or not (and I offer no opinion on that),
Sloan is relatively invulnerable in that regard, I believe, because he
has little or nothing to lose. As far as I know, such offenses are
punishable mainly by fine, not by, say, jail time. (If anyone here is
more knowledgeable in this area of law, feel free to correct me.) If I
understand correctly, Sloan rarely has two nickels to rub together,
figuratively speaking, so a fine, however large, would be meaningless.


Standard tactics say that a counter suit will be filed, and due to the
nature of the pleading there is almost certainly going to be a request for
sanctions. Most people think of Sanctions as monetary, and that is often
the case, however Sanctions can also be used to restrict a pro se from
filing meritless lawsuits without the assisstance of counsel, or pre
approval of the Court. It all depends on how often and how egregious the
violations occur, and the mood of the Court.

So in actual practice, the amount of money one has in the bank is no bar to
Sanctions. Further, Sanctions from the Court cannot be discharged in
Bankruptcy.
--
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same
function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state
of things.
Winston Churchill

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


You know, just because a PRO SE plaintiff incorrectly named a few
defendants does not erase his claims.
Sloan has a real claim against the USCF, Paul Troung, and Susan
Polgar. The other defendants I do not understand,
But I quit law school, so maybe I am a dummy.

No matter how hard everyone tries, they can't erase the fact that
Sloan has a good tort claim against three defendants. The other
Defendants, I believe, I have claim for sanctions, but will simply go
away with a dismissal. If Sloan can keep the case alive into discovery
against
one of the three defendants, then I would call that a WIN for Sloan.

I would very much like to watch the hearing on live internet.

Marcus Roberts

  #7   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 10:45 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 38
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 5:13 pm, wrote:
On Nov 6, 12:51 pm, "Ted E Bear" wrote:





On 6-Nov-2007, Taylor Kingston wrote:


Whether guilty of libel or not (and I offer no opinion on that),
Sloan is relatively invulnerable in that regard, I believe, because he
has little or nothing to lose. As far as I know, such offenses are
punishable mainly by fine, not by, say, jail time. (If anyone here is
more knowledgeable in this area of law, feel free to correct me.) If I
understand correctly, Sloan rarely has two nickels to rub together,
figuratively speaking, so a fine, however large, would be meaningless.


Standard tactics say that a counter suit will be filed, and due to the
nature of the pleading there is almost certainly going to be a request for
sanctions. Most people think of Sanctions as monetary, and that is often
the case, however Sanctions can also be used to restrict a pro se from
filing meritless lawsuits without the assisstance of counsel, or pre
approval of the Court. It all depends on how often and how egregious the
violations occur, and the mood of the Court.


So in actual practice, the amount of money one has in the bank is no bar to
Sanctions. Further, Sanctions from the Court cannot be discharged in
Bankruptcy.
--
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same
function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state
of things.
Winston Churchill


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe#1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


You know, just because a PRO SE plaintiff incorrectly named a few
defendants does not erase his claims.
Sloan has a real claim against the USCF, Paul Troung, and Susan
Polgar. The other defendants I do not understand,
But I quit law school, so maybe I am a dummy.


Sloan has ZERO chance of winning his lawsuit. The best outcome would
be if Sloan were forced to undergo a thorough psychological
examination as well as a polygraph test, and the results made public!
The countersuit depends only on what Polgar and Truong want to do,
that's all.

No matter how hard everyone tries, they can't erase the fact that
Sloan has a good tort claim against three defendants. The other
Defendants, I believe, I have claim for sanctions, but will simply go
away with a dismissal. If Sloan can keep the case alive into discovery
against
one of the three defendants, then I would call that a WIN for Sloan.


Haw. And no one will ever take you seriously or think of you as
anything but a crazed junior wannabe Sloan as long as you keep
defending the worst creature in the world of chess. Eric Moskow is a
patron, and you are a pretender.


I would very much like to watch the hearing on live internet.

Marcus Roberts- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



  #8   Report Post  
Old November 6th 07, 11:25 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,576
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 4:45 pm, wrote:
On Nov 6, 5:13 pm, wrote:





On Nov 6, 12:51 pm, "Ted E Bear" wrote:


On 6-Nov-2007, Taylor Kingston wrote:


Whether guilty of libel or not (and I offer no opinion on that),
Sloan is relatively invulnerable in that regard, I believe, because he
has little or nothing to lose. As far as I know, such offenses are
punishable mainly by fine, not by, say, jail time. (If anyone here is
more knowledgeable in this area of law, feel free to correct me.) If I
understand correctly, Sloan rarely has two nickels to rub together,
figuratively speaking, so a fine, however large, would be meaningless.


Standard tactics say that a counter suit will be filed, and due to the
nature of the pleading there is almost certainly going to be a request for
sanctions. Most people think of Sanctions as monetary, and that is often
the case, however Sanctions can also be used to restrict a pro se from
filing meritless lawsuits without the assisstance of counsel, or pre
approval of the Court. It all depends on how often and how egregious the
violations occur, and the mood of the Court.


So in actual practice, the amount of money one has in the bank is no bar to
Sanctions. Further, Sanctions from the Court cannot be discharged in
Bankruptcy.
--
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same
function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state
of things.
Winston Churchill


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe#1Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


You know, just because a PRO SE plaintiff incorrectly named a few
defendants does not erase his claims.
Sloan has a real claim against the USCF, Paul Troung, and Susan
Polgar. The other defendants I do not understand,
But I quit law school, so maybe I am a dummy.


Sloan has ZERO chance of winning his lawsuit. The best outcome would
be if Sloan were forced to undergo a thorough psychological
examination as well as a polygraph test, and the results made public!
The countersuit depends only on what Polgar and Truong want to do,
that's all.

No matter how hard everyone tries, they can't erase the fact that
Sloan has a good tort claim against three defendants. The other
Defendants, I believe, I have claim for sanctions, but will simply go
away with a dismissal. If Sloan can keep the case alive into discovery
against
one of the three defendants, then I would call that a WIN for Sloan.


Haw. And no one will ever take you seriously or think of you as
anything but a crazed junior wannabe Sloan as long as you keep
defending the worst creature in the world of chess. Eric Moskow is a
patron, and you are a pretender.



I would very much like to watch the hearing on live internet.


Marcus Roberts- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


What is your name?

You are right; I do not patronize organizations that molest children.
Last I spoke with Moskow, he
won't fund the USCF clique anymore either? So, you are a UFO. If I sue
in Federal Court, I don't **** around with process servers,
I USE THE US MARSHALLS. They aren't afraid to walk into a room and
serve 9 people, US Marshalls carry weapons!

HeHeHe it is so much fun to pretend to be somebody else and make death
threats!!!!

HeHeHe

Paul Troung can do whatever he wants

HeHeHe



Marcus Roberts

  #9   Report Post  
Old November 7th 07, 04:14 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Oct 2006
Posts: 248
Default Will Truong, Polger and others counter-sue Sam Sloan if he loses the court case?

On Nov 6, 3:01 pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:
On Nov 6, 3:29 pm, zdrakec wrote:





On Nov 6, 12:25 pm, Taylor Kingston wrote:


On Nov 6, 12:10 pm, Rich Hutnik wrote:


The amount of stuff Sam is posting here looks real close to being a
possible case of slander/libel, if it doesn't pan out. I am curious
if Sam will be counter-sued here. Anyone have any idea? To
repeatedly dump dirt on someone in a public forum long-term has been
brought into a court of law as part of character defamation cases,
hasn't it?


Whether guilty of libel or not (and I offer no opinion on that),
Sloan is relatively invulnerable in that regard, I believe, because he
has little or nothing to lose. As far as I know, such offenses are
punishable mainly by fine, not by, say, jail time. (If anyone here is
more knowledgeable in this area of law, feel free to correct me.) If I
understand correctly, Sloan rarely has two nickels to rub together,
figuratively speaking, so a fine, however large, would be meaningless.
Another prolific "chess writer" somewhat like Sloan is James R.A.
Schroeder. I don't recall that Schroeder has ever been especially
litigious, but he always been vituperative to a high degree, freely
tossing insults, accusations and other highly derogatory, inflammatory
and defamatory remarks at grandmasters, editors, historians,
tournament organizers and other chess personages, both major (e.g.
Yasser Seirawan, Tony Miles, Mikhail Botvinnik) and minor (e.g.
myself). Some, perhaps even much, of what he's written has probably
been actionable. But legal action would be futile, like trying to get
blood from a stone.


Oh, how I loved those newletters that Schroeder used to put out. Great
entertainment!


Those must have been different from the Schroeder material I've
seen, which is several pages of his "Confidential Chess Lessons" plus
a few letters and postcards he sent me. Consisted mainly of him
calling people "moron," "imbecile," "idiot," "stupid" etc. He would
present analytical "refutations" that refuted nothing and "historical
articles" based on anything but fact. He would fault everyone's
spelling and grammar, when in fact he was as qualified to do this as
Ray Charles was to judge paintings. Simply the crude ravings of a
disturbed, toxic mind put into a chess context.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


No, no, those are exactly the ones I meant. After thoroughly enjoying
the rants, I would then put them to good use lining the bottom of my
bird cages - he was well qualified to do that!
Regards,
zdrakec

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



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:28 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