Main
Date: 05 Jul 2006 15:47:06
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

I just got back from the World Open. In my absence, 16 fake messages
supposedly from me have been posted especially to the Newsgroup
rec.games.chess.politics .

I have proof that I did not post these fakes because as everybody at
the World Open knows, I spent three days from July 2 to July 4 handing
out my election propaganda. I did not post anything or go online
during those dates. I handed out 400 flyers. I did not see even one of
them discarded or thrown in the trash, so is seems that a substantial
portion of them actually got read.

Of the 16 fake postings during those dates, 14 of them came from
[email protected] . These are, in general, easy to spot as fakes
because they say things that I would obviously never say.

However, two fake postings were from From: "Sam Sloan"
[email protected] and twistycreek.com

These two are matters of concern because in the first place they are
not short and obscene as postings from [email protected] typically are.

Rather, they are long and detailed and written in a style similar to
mine. I suspect that the average reader will not realize that they are
fake.

One of them is entitled Kayo may be Pregnant Again. This is especially
annoying because although I have long ago given up hope that people
will stop attacking me, it is beyond the pale to say anything about my
wife and minor children.

I would never say publicly whether my wife is or is not pregnant
because there is an old saw that that a pregnancy should never be
announced until the baby is born, because there might be a miscarriage
or the baby might not come out alright. Some say it brings bad luck. I
am not a believer in bad luck but I do follow this rule. I am aware
that movie stars, in order to gain publicity for themselves, announce
their pregnancies as do members of the royal families, to maintain
their dynasties, but normal people do not do that.

My last posting just moments prior to leaving for the World Open was
entitled "Executive Board motion authorizing the borrowing of
$561,000"

That was posted at Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 16:37:59 GMT

Any postings by Sam Sloan between that date and this posting here was
fake.

Sam Sloan




 
Date: 26 Jul 2006 08:14:12
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (24 Jul 2006 19:08:31 -0700):
7 ... The biography of Jana Bellin as presently posted is virtually
7 identical to the original one I posted except that the order of
7 her husbands is changed and you added that she won the
7 British Woman's Championship several times.
_
I wrote (26 Jul 2006 06:15:31 -0700):
7 The "original":
7
7 "...
7 Jana Bellin (b. 1947 in Czechoslovakia) is a Woman
7 Grandmaster of chess.
7
7 She is best known for rying chess grandmasters.
7 First she ried Grandmaster Tony Miles. Then she
7 ried William Hartston. Then she ried Robert
7 Bellin.
7
7 This information may not be up to date, as it is difficult
7 to keep up with recent developments.
7
7 She is a medical doctor and Chairman of the FIDE
7 Medical Commission, which supervises drug testing
7 of chess players. She has become controversial in
7 FIDE, because many chess grandmasters object to
7 being tested for drugs, because it is expensive and
7 there is no history of drug abuse by chess players,
7 nor is there any evidence that drugs can improve
7 chess performance. ..." - Sam Sloan
7 ([email protected],
7 NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255,
7 Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:41:55 GMT)
7
7
7 The "presently posted" version is at:
7
7 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Bellin

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (26 Jul 2006 06:59:13 -0700):

7 This post by Louis Blair is misleading, as his posts usually
7 are, because he merely posts the first draft of my biography
7 of Jana Bellin.

_
As indicated, the source for my note was what Sam Sloan
([email protected], NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
himself chose to share with us on Wed, 21 Dec 2005
15:41:55 GMT.

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (26 Jul 2006 06:59:13 -0700):

7 It is important to point out that biographies on Wikipedia are
7 not intended to be the last word on any subject. They are
7 intended to be the first word and others are encouraged to
7 come in and add additional information.

_
My previous note (like this one) contained, at the beginning,
the Sam Sloan ([email protected], NNTP-Posting-Host:
68.199.110.255) comment about the revision that took place
between the "original" and the "presently posted" version.

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (26 Jul 2006 06:59:13 -0700):

7 Here is my first complete biography of Jana Bellin, before
7 anybody else edited it.
7
7 Jana Bellin
7 >From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
7 Revision as of 15:35, 21 December 2005; Sam Sloan
7
7 Jana Bellin (b. 1947 in Czechoslovakia) is a Woman
7 Grandmaster of chess.
7
7 She is best known for rying chess grandmasters.
7 First she ried Grandmaster Tony Miles. Then she
7 ried William Hartston. Then she ried Robert
7 Bellin.
7
7 This information may not be up to date, as it is difficult
7 to keep up with recent developments.
7
7 She is a medical doctor and Chairman of the FIDE
7 Medical Commission, which supervises drug testing
7 of chess players. She has become controversial in
7 FIDE, because many chess grandmasters object to
7 being tested for drugs, because it is expensive and
7 there is no history of drug abuse by chess players,
7 nor is there any evidence that drugs can improve
7 chess performance.
7
7 External links
7
7 * FIDE rating card for Jana Bellin
7
7 Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Bellin"
7
7 Categories: 1947 births


 
Date: 26 Jul 2006 07:58:15
From: London Chess
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
Hey asshole, she's not best known for rying chess grandmasters.
You're a dick.

Cheers,
Tony

samsloan wrote:
>
> She is best known for rying chess grandmasters. First she ried
> Grandmaster Tony Miles. Then she ried William Hartston. Then she
> ried Robert Bellin.
>
> * FIDE rating card for Jana Bellin
>
> Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Bellin"
>
> Categories: 1947 births


 
Date: 26 Jul 2006 06:59:13
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
This post by Louis Blair is misleading, as his posts usually are,
because he merely posts the first draft of my biography of Jana Bellin.

It is important to point out that biographies on Wikipedia are not
intended to be the last word on any subject. They are intended to be
the first word and others are encouraged to come in and add additional
information.

Here is my first complete biography of Jana Bellin, before anybody else
edited it.

Jana Bellin
>From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Revision as of 15:35, 21 December 2005; Sam Sloan

Jana Bellin (b. 1947 in Czechoslovakia) is a Woman Grandmaster of
chess.

She is best known for rying chess grandmasters. First she ried
Grandmaster Tony Miles. Then she ried William Hartston. Then she
ried Robert Bellin.

This information may not be up to date, as it is difficult to keep up
with recent developments.

She is a medical doctor and Chairman of the FIDE Medical Commission,
which supervises drug testing of chess players. She has become
controversial in FIDE, because many chess grandmasters object to being
tested for drugs, because it is expensive and there is no history of
drug abuse by chess players, nor is there any evidence that drugs can
improve chess performance.

External links

* FIDE rating card for Jana Bellin

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Bellin"

Categories: 1947 births


 
Date: 26 Jul 2006 06:15:31
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (24 Jul 2006 19:08:31 -0700):

7 ... The biography of Jana Bellin as presently posted is virtually
7 identical to the original one I posted except that the order of
7 her husbands is changed and you added that she won the
7 British Woman's Championship several times.

_
The "original":
_
"...
Jana Bellin (b. 1947 in Czechoslovakia) is a Woman
Grandmaster of chess.
_
She is best known for rying chess grandmasters.
First she ried Grandmaster Tony Miles. Then she
ried William Hartston. Then she ried Robert
Bellin.
_
This information may not be up to date, as it is difficult
to keep up with recent developments.
_
She is a medical doctor and Chairman of the FIDE
Medical Commission, which supervises drug testing
of chess players. She has become controversial in
FIDE, because many chess grandmasters object to
being tested for drugs, because it is expensive and
there is no history of drug abuse by chess players,
nor is there any evidence that drugs can improve
chess performance. ..." - Sam Sloan
([email protected],
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255,
Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:41:55 GMT)
_
_
The "presently posted" version is at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Bellin



 
Date: 25 Jul 2006 03:17:44
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
Pretz wrote:
> I think he is referring to this rek by you, Sam Sloan:
>
> "She is best known for rying chess grandmasters. First she ried
> Grandmaster Tomy Miles. Then she ried William Hartson. Then she ried
> Robert Bellin"

The advantage to Wikipedia is that if there is an error anybody can
correct it.

In this case, I had the names of her husbands right. I just had the
order she ried them wrong.

Wlod could have corrected this himself, but chose not to do so.

Instead Wlod wrote a long screed attacking me for simily naming her
husbands in the wrong order.

So, I corrected it, putting Hartson first, Miles second and Bellin
third.

Sam Sloan



  
Date: 25 Jul 2006 11:54:32
From: Yutz
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
"samsloan" < > In this case, I had the names of her husbands right. I just
had the
> order she ried them wrong.
>

Your snide rek basically categorized the woman as some kind of Chess
Whore or groupie. If you can't understand how badly you fucked up, then I am
beginning to understand why so many people think that you are a first-class
asshole.




   
Date: 25 Jul 2006 17:52:12
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 11:54:32 GMT, "Yutz" <[email protected] > wrote:

>"samsloan" <> In this case, I had the names of her husbands right. I just
>had the
>> order she ried them wrong.
>>
>
>Your snide rek basically categorized the woman as some kind of Chess
>Whore or groupie. If you can't understand how badly you fucked up, then I am
>beginning to understand why so many people think that you are a first-class
>asshole.

The news about her frequent riages to famous chess masters was
published in British Chess Magazine as they occurred, which is why
everybody else but you knows about it.

Sam Sloan


    
Date: 25 Jul 2006 18:39:40
From: Yutz
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
"Sam Sloan" < > The news about her frequent riages to famous chess masters
was
> published in British Chess Magazine as they occurred, which is why
everybody else but you knows about it. >

Yes, but the snide, disrespectful reks were your own creation. No doubt
she turned you down when you made your run at her.




 
Date: 24 Jul 2006 19:08:31
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
I have no idea what you are referring to.

The biography of Jana Bellin as presently posted is virtually identical
to the original one I posted except that the order of her husbands is
changed and you added that she won the British Woman's Championship
several times.

If I had not posted her biography originally, there would be no
biography online now.

Sam Sloan



  
Date: 25 Jul 2006 03:19:24
From: Pretz
Subject: Re: Dishonest Sam Sloan
I think he is referring to this rek by you, Sam Sloan:

"She is best known for rying chess grandmasters. First she ried
Grandmaster Tomy Miles. Then she ried William Hartson. Then she ried
Robert Bellin"




 
Date: 24 Jul 2006 18:35:04
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod)
Subject: Dishonest Sam Sloan
Into a short post Sam was able to embed
so much dishonesty that it would suffice for
a monograph.

samsloan wrote:

> There is absolutely nothing wrong with
> my biography of Jana Bellin

Your usage of "is" is already dishonest.
Only "was" applies to your version. Your
"is" suggests that your version somehow
is related in an essential way with your
version. This is completely FALSE. The
present version in its effect CONTRADICTS
what you have written and implied.
The fact that some words still remain
from the old version does not change
the fact that your usage of "is" is DISHONEST.

Your claim about "absolutely nothing wrong"
is thus extra dishonest. It is the dirty
politician method to repeat a convennient lie
over and over, over the facts and arguments
made the lie plainly seen to anybody, who
cares to follow the polemics. But a dirty
politician will repeat his lie anyway.

> (which, incidentally, was modified
> by you on July 14).

Your usage of "modified" is dishonest.
The meaning and impact and effect of the bio
has turned the full 180 degrees, from
yours which was demeaning to the one which
presents Jana Bellin with respect.

> Here it is. Please tell us what you
> think is wrong with it or why she
> would not be happy about it.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Bellin

You are extremely dishonest, when you write
like this. The present bio, in its spirit, has
nothing to do with your version. I don't
see anythiung wrong witrh the present version,
and everything wrong with your DIRTY
original version (possibly the dirt was only
partially for your fun, while perhaps in your
dirty mind you were also trying to score some
political points).

> Incidentally, I wrote a biography of Leroy
> Dubeck which may explain why
> he supported me for election and got me elected.

This once again show how corrupted and dishonest
you are. Encyclopedias should be protected from
the slime creatures like you.

Wlod



 
Date: 23 Jul 2006 15:37:42
From:
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

samsloan wrote:
> Paul Rubin wrote:
> > "samsloan" <[email protected]> writes:
> > > Incidentally, I wrote a biography of Leroy Dubeck which may explain why
> > > he supported me for election and got me elected.
> >
> > Dubeck supported you? Is there any public record of that, i.e.
> > something written by Dubeck himself, or was it just behind the scenes?
>
> Leroy Dubeck called a Special Meeting of the New Jersey State Chess
> Association just to announce that he was supporting me for election to
> the Executive Board and to recommend that the association endorse me
> for election, which it did.
>
> There was a lot of grumbling especially by Steve Doyle but they went
> along with his recommendation.
>
> I was as shocked as anybody when I learned about this.
>
> If you will look at the numbers you will see that this what got me
> elected and, of course, Dubeck has me in his hip pocket now.
>
> Sam Sloan

Well Sammy, maybe if Leroy can get his wife to launder his pants, the
slime and taint will be removed from them...

Ron Suarez



 
Date: 23 Jul 2006 15:31:32
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Paul Rubin wrote:
> "samsloan" <[email protected]> writes:
> > Incidentally, I wrote a biography of Leroy Dubeck which may explain why
> > he supported me for election and got me elected.
>
> Dubeck supported you? Is there any public record of that, i.e.
> something written by Dubeck himself, or was it just behind the scenes?

Leroy Dubeck called a Special Meeting of the New Jersey State Chess
Association just to announce that he was supporting me for election to
the Executive Board and to recommend that the association endorse me
for election, which it did.

There was a lot of grumbling especially by Steve Doyle but they went
along with his recommendation.

I was as shocked as anybody when I learned about this.

If you will look at the numbers you will see that this what got me
elected and, of course, Dubeck has me in his hip pocket now.

Sam Sloan



  
Date: 24 Jul 2006 00:49:14
From: Paul Rubin
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
"samsloan" <[email protected] > writes:
> Leroy Dubeck called a Special Meeting of the New Jersey State Chess
> Association just to announce that he was supporting me for election to
> the Executive Board and to recommend that the association endorse me
> for election, which it did.

I can't find anything about this at www.njscf.org, including in the
forum section. Was there an announcement of any kind? (Is something
really an endorsement if there's no announcement?)


 
Date: 23 Jul 2006 14:44:32
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) wrote:
> samsloan wrote:
> >
> > Louis Blair wrote:
> >
> > > Jana Bellin?
> >
> > Why do you assume that Jana Bellin is not thankful to me for posting
> > her biography on Wikipedia?
> >
> > Do you know her?
>
> Sam Sloan, you have lied when you wrote that
> all people you have written about, including Jana Bellin,
> liked what you have done to them or even were grateful to you.
>
> This is basically beside the point anyway.
> An encyclopedia should not be used to
> advertise yourself, to gain more notoriety,
> to get any side advantages, including the
> gratefulnes of the subjects.
>
> You and your junk do not belong to encyclopedias.
> You and your junk, and **your** notion of "notable"
> belongs to the gossip mags, to the dirty magazines,
> and that's all. For what you have written and ommitted
> about Jana Bellin you should not be permitted to
> mess any encyclopedia anymore. Stick to
> dirty magazines and to USCF.
>
> Wlod

There is absolutely nothing wrong with my biography of Jana Bellin
(which, incidentally, was modified by you on July 14). Here it is.
Please tell us what you think is wrong with it or why she would not be
happy about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jana_Bellin

Incidentally, I wrote a biography of Leroy Dubeck which may explain why
he supported me for election and got me elected.

Sam Sloan



  
Date: 23 Jul 2006 14:47:38
From: Paul Rubin
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
"samsloan" <[email protected] > writes:
> Incidentally, I wrote a biography of Leroy Dubeck which may explain why
> he supported me for election and got me elected.

Dubeck supported you? Is there any public record of that, i.e.
something written by Dubeck himself, or was it just behind the scenes?


 
Date: 23 Jul 2006 14:35:44
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod)
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
samsloan wrote:
>
> Louis Blair wrote:
>
> > Jana Bellin?
>
> Why do you assume that Jana Bellin is not thankful to me for posting
> her biography on Wikipedia?
>
> Do you know her?

Sam Sloan, you have lied when you wrote that
all people you have written about, including Jana Bellin,
liked what you have done to them or even were grateful to you.

This is basically beside the point anyway.
An encyclopedia should not be used to
advertise yourself, to gain more notoriety,
to get any side advantages, including the
gratefulnes of the subjects.

You and your junk do not belong to encyclopedias.
You and your junk, and **your** notion of "notable"
belongs to the gossip mags, to the dirty magazines,
and that's all. For what you have written and ommitted
about Jana Bellin you should not be permitted to
mess any encyclopedia anymore. Stick to
dirty magazines and to USCF.

Wlod

> You are imposing your morality on her. You probably think it is a bad
> thing that she has been ried to three famous chess masters.
> Obviously, she does not think so. Otherwise, she would not have ried
> them. All of these riages have been highly publicized, especially in
> British Chass Magazine. At least she waited a decent interval,
> sometimes as long as two or three weeks, between riages. What is
> wrong with that?
>
> Do you think that it was wrong of me to mention that she is trying to
> impose universal drug testing on all chess masters? She can resign her
> position any time, and has not done so.
>
> Sam Sloan



 
Date: 22 Jul 2006 11:19:16
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!postnews.google.com!m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "samsloan" <[email protected] >
Newsgroups:
rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,misc.legal,alt.chess
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World
Open
Date: 11 Jul 2006 05:23:13 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <[email protected] >
References: <[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1152620597 6696 127.0.0.1 (11 Jul 2006
12:23:17 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2006 12:23:17 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected] >
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.8.0.4) Gecko/20060508 Firefox/1.5.0.4,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: [email protected]
Injection-Info: m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=68.199.110.255;
posting-account=2jt8PAsAAABkihm-TH9reeEIPrfGXdh2

Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) wrote:

> Since you have admitted to an attempt at posting
> a HUNDRED bigraphies in wikiedia, it is only
> right and logical that counter-actions were "constant",
> and that "several" of your posts were deleted.
> I wish, ALL of your attempts failed.

I did not "attempt" to post 100 chess biographies on Wikipedia. I did
post 100 chess biographies on Wikipedia. All but one of them is still
there.

I merely waited until Ralf Callenberg, Paul Rubin and Louis Blair were
not looking and reposted them.

I added a new biography yesterday and no I am not going to tell you
where it is for fear that they will vandalize it again.

Sam Sloan
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

samsloan wrote:
> Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) wrote:
>
> > Since you have admitted to an attempt at posting
> > a HUNDRED bigraphies in wikiedia, it is only
> > right and logical that counter-actions were "constant",
> > and that "several" of your posts were deleted.
> > I wish, ALL of your attempts failed.
>
> I did not "attempt" to post 100 chess biographies on Wikipedia. I did
> post 100 chess biographies on Wikipedia. All but one of them is still
> there.
>
> I merely waited until Ralf Callenberg, Paul Rubin and Louis Blair were
> not looking and reposted them.
>
> I added a new biography yesterday and no I am not going to tell you
> where it is for fear that they will vandalize it again.
>
> Sam Sloan



  
Date: 23 Jul 2006 00:16:09
From: Ringo
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Hey Stoopid Blair:

Where are you messages? You keep re-posting all these messages from other
people, and I have no idea if you are saying anything, since it is just a
jumble of old messages.




 
Date: 12 Jul 2006 06:24:25
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Wed, 21 Dec 2005 15:41:55 GMT):
7 ...
7 Jana Bellin (b. 1947 in Czechoslovakia) is a Woman
7 Grandmaster of chess.
7
7 She is best known for rying chess grandmasters. First
7 she ried Grandmaster Tony Miles. Then she ried
7 William Hartston. Then she ried Robert Bellin.
7
7 This information may not be up to date, as it is difficult to
7 keep up with recent developments.
7
7 She is a medical doctor and Chairman of the FIDE Medical
7 Commission, which supervises drug testing of chess players.
7 She has become controversial in FIDE, because many chess
7 grandmasters object to being tested for drugs, because it is
7 expensive and there is no history of drug abuse by chess
7 players, nor is there any evidence that drugs can improve
7 chess performance.
7 ...
_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
_
7 ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
7 All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
7 for doing this. ...
_
I wrote (12 Jul 2006 04:35:05 -0700):
7 Jana Bellin?

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (12 Jul 2006 05:36:37 -0700):

7 Why do you assume that Jana Bellin is not thankful to me for
7 posting her biography on Wikipedia?
7
7 Do you know her?

_
Sam Sloan is asking the wrong question. The appropriate
question is whether or not Sam Sloan knows her? HE is the
one making the assertion that Jana Bellin is thankful to Sam
Sloan. What exactly are his grounds for making this assertion?

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (12 Jul 2006 05:36:37 -0700):

7 You are imposing your morality on her. You probably think it
7 is a bad thing that she has been ried to three famous chess
7 masters. Obviously, she does not think so. Otherwise, she
7 would not have ried them. All of these riages have been
7 highly publicized, especially in British Chass Magazine. At
7 least she waited a decent interval, sometimes as long as two
7 or three weeks, between riages. What is wrong with that?

_
Here, the issue isn't what is wrong with her activities. The issue
is whether or not she is thankful for the Sam Sloan style of
reporting.
_
"... This information may not be up to date, as it
is difficult to keep up with recent developments. ..."

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (12 Jul 2006 05:36:37 -0700):

7 Do you think that it was wrong of me to mention that she is
7 trying to impose universal drug testing on all chess masters?
7 She can resign her position any time, and has not done so.

_
Again, here, the issue is whether or not she is thankful for the
Sam Sloan style of reporting.
_
By the way, how much longer is Sam Sloan going to duck the
question about whether or not Edward Winter is thankful to
Sam Sloan for his Wikipedia EW biography?



 
Date: 12 Jul 2006 05:36:37
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Louis Blair wrote:
> samsloan ([email protected])
> (NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
> wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
> _
> 7 ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
> 7 All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
> 7 for doing this. ...
> _
> _
> Jana Bellin?

Why do you assume that Jana Bellin is not thankful to me for posting
her biography on Wikipedia?

Do you know her?

You are imposing your morality on her. You probably think it is a bad
thing that she has been ried to three famous chess masters.
Obviously, she does not think so. Otherwise, she would not have ried
them. All of these riages have been highly publicized, especially in
British Chass Magazine. At least she waited a decent interval,
sometimes as long as two or three weeks, between riages. What is
wrong with that?

Do you think that it was wrong of me to mention that she is trying to
impose universal drug testing on all chess masters? She can resign her
position any time, and has not done so.

Sam Sloan



 
Date: 12 Jul 2006 04:35:05
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
samsloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
_
7 ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
7 All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
7 for doing this. ...
_
_
Jana Bellin?



 
Date: 11 Jul 2006 17:38:58
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 19:42:49 -0700):
> ... Please provide any evidence you have that any of these
> statements are untrue. ...
_
I wrote (9 Jul 2006 22:34:50 -0700):
> Sam Sloan seems to have failed to keep in mind how
> Wikipedia works. As a reminder:
> ...
> "... Please read the content at the following links very
> carefully:
>_
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
>_
> ... Until you can prove all of these claims, they have no
> business being in the article. Wikipedia is not a forum for you
> to write articles chock full of your own opinions, speculations,
> and rants. ..." - Howard Cheng (22:30, 3 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Edward_G._Winter
_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:57:18 GMT):
> ... Why do you have this irksome habit of providing long lists of
> quotes of others without providing anything original yourselt?
_
I wrote (10 Jul 2006 07:01:54 -0700):
> ... I provided the Charles Matthews and Howard Cheng quotes
> as a reminder of how Wikipedia works. I saw no need for any
> additional words from me on that subject.

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (11 Jul 2006 05:01:05 -0700):

> If you have nothing to do with your life but provide the quotes of
> others, what are you doing here and why are you wasting our
> time?
>
> We can go out and find those quotes ourselves.

_
When Sam Sloan ([email protected]) (NNTP-Posting-Host:
68.199.110.255) writes about Wikipedia, it seems to me to be
worthwhile to make some information readily available to those
reading the thread.



 
Date: 11 Jul 2006 13:49:32
From: Barnabas Collins
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 15:47:06 GMT, [email protected] (Sam Sloan)
wrote:

>16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

Memo to self:
Don't even think of joining this chess organization. Instead spend
the money on a multi-player chess game for my pocket pc.

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


 
Date: 11 Jul 2006 05:23:13
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod) wrote:

> Since you have admitted to an attempt at posting
> a HUNDRED bigraphies in wikiedia, it is only
> right and logical that counter-actions were "constant",
> and that "several" of your posts were deleted.
> I wish, ALL of your attempts failed.

I did not "attempt" to post 100 chess biographies on Wikipedia. I did
post 100 chess biographies on Wikipedia. All but one of them is still
there.

I merely waited until Ralf Callenberg, Paul Rubin and Louis Blair were
not looking and reposted them.

I added a new biography yesterday and no I am not going to tell you
where it is for fear that they will vandalize it again.

Sam Sloan



 
Date: 11 Jul 2006 05:01:05
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Louis Blair wrote:

> I provided the Charles Matthews and Howard Cheng quotes
> as a reminder of how Wikipedia works. I saw no need for any
> additional words from me on that subject.

If you have nothing to do with your life but provide the quotes of
others, what are you doing here and why are you wasting our time?

We can go out and find those quotes ourselves.

Sam Sloan



 
Date: 11 Jul 2006 01:17:05
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (wlod)
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
samsloan wrote:

> Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
>
> > Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!
> >
> > To give a useful institution like Wikipedia a chance
> > it is necessary to keep the likes of Sam Sloan as far
> > away from it as possible.
> >
> > Wlod
>
> Kindly explain your statement. I posted about 100 biographies of chess
> players to Wikipedia.

That's horrible!

> All of the people that I wrote biographies of are
> thankful to me for doing this.

You are lying again. And it's irrelevant anyway.

> Then a few of my regular critics here started going over to Wikipedia
> and attacking me there. Principal among these were Louis Blair, Paul
> Rubin, Ralf Callenberg, Neil Bernnen and Bill Brock.

I am grateful to them.

> Because of their constant attacks, they succeeded
> in getting several of my biographies of chess players deleted.

Since you have admitted to an attempt at posting
a HUNDRED bigraphies in wikiedia, it is only
right and logical that counter-actions were "constant",
and that "several" of your posts were deleted.
I wish, ALL of your attempts failed. Your accuracy,
objectivity and good-will standards are way below
journalistic, and even more so for making contributions
to an encyclopedia.

> For example, I posted the campaign biographies
> of all of the members of Bessel Kok's team that
> was running for FIDE election.

Wikipedia should not serve you as a political
stepping stone. Find other ways to serve your
potential political sponsors.

> Because of the efforts principally of Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg,
> the biographies of the candidates for FIDE Election were repeatedly
> deleted.

As I said, you have no business to touch wikipedia.

> This helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected as President of FIDE,
> especially since Ralf Callenberg kept deleting all of the well known
> negative facts about Kirsan Ilyumzhinov.

You are so full of yourself. The above statement is
the most idiotic statement which I have read in the
connection with the FIDE elections.

> In all this time, I did not see you, Wlod, over there.

Over where? I don't want to have anything to do with you.

> Kindly explain why you think that my posting of chess
> biographies on Wikipedia was "disgusting".
>
> Sam Sloan

Sam, I am not going to go over a hundred of your
bullshit stories. I'll choose one for a separate thread.
One spoon of soup gives a good idea about the
whole stinking bowl.

Stay away from wikipedia,

Wlod



 
Date: 10 Jul 2006 18:09:06
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
> ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
> All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
> for doing this. ...
_
I wrote (9 Jul 2006 17:40:06 -0700):
> Edward Winter?
_
_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
> ... I posted the campaign biographies of all of the members of
> Bessel Kok's team that was running for FIDE election.
>_
> Because of the efforts principally of Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg,
> the biographies of the candidates for FIDE Election were repeatedly
> deleted.
_
I reproduced (9 Jul 2006 17:40:06 -0700)
some Wikipedia quotes:
> "... Sloan recently took it on himself to campaign for Bessel
> Kok's slate of candidates in the upcoming FIDE election
> (http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/14c509552b9798be).
> He put a biography of Panupand Vijjuprabha (one of Kok's team) on
> Wikipedia, that was an obvious campaign piece that included stuff
> like Vijjuprabha's phone number. I felt this was non-notable so I
> made an AfD nomination to get community opinion
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Panupand_Vijjuprabha).
> I then noticed the article was pasted verbatim from Kok's group's
> web site
> (http://www.rightmove06.org/index.php?set_language=en&cccpage=articleview&set_z_articles=62)
> without attribution, so I noted that (and gave the link) in the AfD.
> The bio was speedied as a copyvio a few minutes later.
>_
> ... Sloan copied several more bios from the same source over the next
> hour. I entered SD requests for these, giving the source links
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions&oldid=44761556#Deletion_of_Articles).
> These too were speedied (Ali Nihat Yazici, Julio C=C3=A9sar Ingolotti,
> and Geoffrey Borg). I also briefly put up a SD request for Bessel Kok
> (mentioning his higher notability), but I then saw that Kok's bio
> contained a mixture of copied and non-copied material, so I took
> down my SD request and edited out the copied material. Except for
> Kok and Yazici, these people are non-notable (a few hundred
> Google hits at most). ..." - Paul Rubin (05:41, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_
>_
> "... I commend to Sam Sloan the following:
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox).
> I do not believe I am alone in seeing strong evidence of Sam Sloan
> extending to his Wikipedia contributions the strong agenda he has
> outside of Wikipedia. The solution is not for those who disagree with
> Sloan to stop editing, it's for Sloan to stop adding tendentious
> content. And Sam, sometimes when everybody tells you that you
> are wrong, it's because you are wrong." - [Guy Chapman]
> (10:18, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095
_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:30:22 GMT):
> The above quotes are perfect examples of how Louis Blair,
> Ralf Callenberg and Paul Rubin interfered in the FIDE
> Election in Turin, Italy and helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
> re-elected.
>_
> Perhaps Kirsan should award his traditional bribe of a Rolex Watch to
> those such as Louis Blair, Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg who use
> underhanded means to help get him elected.
_
I wrote (10 Jul 2006 04:12:01 -0700):
> The ONLY quote of me up there is: "Edward Winter?"
>_
> Sam Sloan does not explain what is "underhanded" about it. Nor
> does he explain how a note, posted after the election, could have
> "helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected."

_
Blind Frank wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:08:53 GMT):

> Even though you only wrote a note after the election, it was your
> attitude before the election that swung the crucial votes.

_
I assume/hope that Blind Frank is joking. Still, it should be
remembered that Sam Sloan did not merely claim that I "helped"
Kirsan. He wrote that I "[used] underhanded means" and
"interfered in the FIDE Election in Turin, Italy". Of course, no
specific pre-vote action by me was specified.

_
Referring to "most of those Wikipedia Editors",
Blind Frank wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:10:56 GMT):

> ... What a bunch of losers.

_
Losers or not, their stated intention is to enforce Wikipedia
rules - things like: (1) no copyright violation, (2) no original
research, (3) no unsourced criticism of living persons, and
(4) neutral point of view. There is no obligation for them to
set aside such rules in order to serve a political objective.
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox
_
_
_
_
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!news4.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!cc65c843!not-for-mail
From: "Blind Frank" <[email protected] >
Newsgroups:
rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,misc.legal,alt.chess
References: <[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World
Open
Lines: 10
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807
Message-ID: <[email protected] >
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:08:53 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.100.24.235
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
X-Trace: newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net 1152533333 67.100.24.235
(Mon, 10 Jul 2006 05:08:53 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 05:08:53 PDT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net

X-No-archive: yes

"Louis Blair" <Nor does he explain how a note, posted after the
election,
could have
> "helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected.">

Even though you only wrote a note after the election, it was your
attitude
before the election that swung the crucial votes.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
_
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Path:
g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!atl-c05.usenetserver.com!news.usenetserver.com!peer01.west.cox.net!cox.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.pas.earthlink.net!newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net.POSTED!cc65c843!not-for-mail
From: "Blind Frank" <[email protected] >
Newsgroups:
rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer,misc.legal,alt.chess
References: <[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
<[email protected] >
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World
Open
Lines: 13
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807
Message-ID: <[email protected] >
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 12:10:56 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.100.24.235
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
X-Trace: newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net 1152533456 67.100.24.235
(Mon, 10 Jul 2006 05:10:56 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 05:10:56 PDT
Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net

X-No-archive: yes

"Sam Sloan" < > Obviously, Howard Cheng, who wrote the above words, has
no
knowledge of this subject, as he himself admits. >

Most of those Wikipedia Editors (all volunteer work-force for a
billion-dollar company) are handicapped, wheel-chair bound shut-ins who
can
spend all day at the Wikipedia website working for free so that the
stock-holders continue to reap millions in profits.

What a bunch of losers.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA



 
Date: 10 Jul 2006 07:01:54
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
I wrote (9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700):
> ... Some sample ridiculous statements from the Sam Sloan
> text (posted here, Fri, 03 2006 16:46:37 GMT):
> _
> (1) "For the past more than 30 years, every time a new book
> by Keene has come out or a new article by Keene has been
> published, Edward Winter has written articles attacking it."
>_
> (2) "Kingston is from the same part of England that Winter is
> believed to be from."
>_
> (3) "Edward Winter filed an ethics complaint with the FIDE
> Congress accusing Keene of unethical conduct in writing
> books almost exclusively about opening theory, whereas
> Winter said there should be more books about chess history."
>_
> (4) "Keene's opponent was Florencio Campomanes who
> Winter supported."
>_
> (5) "Chess Notes ... contains brief commentaries usually not
> more than one or two paragraphs in length attacking usually
> insignificant errors and spelling mistakes made by this or that
> chess writer."
>_
> (6) "If a book by Keene contains a spelling mistake, Chess
> Notes will point it out."
>_
> "Wow, I didn't know that ... San Diego, California
> (where I was born and lived until 1980) [is] part of
> England." - Taylor Kingston (3 2006
> 11:25:28 -0800)
>_
> http://www.chesshistory.com/
_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 19:42:49 -0700):
> ... Please provide any evidence you have that any of these
> statements are untrue. ...
_
I wrote (9 Jul 2006 22:34:50 -0700):
> Sam Sloan seems to have failed to keep in mind how
> Wikipedia works. As a reminder:
> ...
> "... Please read the content at the following links very
> carefully:
>_
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
>_
> ... Until you can prove all of these claims, they have no
> business being in the article. Wikipedia is not a forum for you
> to write articles chock full of your own opinions, speculations,
> and rants. ..." - Howard Cheng (22:30, 3 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Edward_G._Winter
>_
> In my 9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700 note (reproduced above), I
> provided a link to Chess Notes so that people can get an idea
> about some of these matters (especially, "(5)").

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:57:18 GMT):

> ... look at the pages about Verifiability on Wikipedia that you
> cite above. One of them states:
>_
> "If you are familiar with the subject matter, please check for
> inaccuracies and modify as needed, citing sources."
>_
> That means that to change the content of one of my pages YOU
> need to cite sources. Neither you nor Howard Cheng have the
> authority under Wikipedia rules to massively delete and vandalize
> anything I write unless you are familiar with the subject matter.

_
Here is what I find at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability :
_
"Editors adding new material to an article should cite
a reputable source, or it may be removed by any editor."
_
"The obligation to provide a reputable source lies with
the editors wishing to include the material, not on those
seeking to remove it."
_
"Remove unsourced material about living persons
immediately if it could be viewed as criticism"

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:57:18 GMT):

> ... Now, going to the page you cite above, it says:
>_
> Attention Sam Sloan
>_
> Like I asked you previously on Talk:Chess Life, please cite your
> sources. Some examples: ...

_
At this time, I have no interest in the examples from that page.
I mentioned the page because of the PRINCIPLE that was
indicated there:
_
"... Until you can prove all of these claims, they have no
business being in the article. Wikipedia is not a forum for you
to write articles chock full of your own opinions, speculations,
and rants. ..." - Howard Cheng (22:30, 3 ch 2006 (UTC))

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:57:18 GMT):

> Are you disputing ...

_
Sam Sloan should see my 9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700 note
(partially reproduced at the beginning above) for a list of the
six items that I am currently concerned about.

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:57:18 GMT):

> Why do you have this irksome habit of providing long lists of
> quotes of others without providing anything original yourselt?

_
I provided the Charles Matthews and Howard Cheng quotes
as a reminder of how Wikipedia works. I saw no need for any
additional words from me on that subject.



 
Date: 10 Jul 2006 06:35:30
From: Skeptic
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

Sam Sloan wrote:

> If you had ever seen anything written by my son Peter, you would know
> that he cannot immitate me.

Thank God.



 
Date: 10 Jul 2006 04:12:01
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
> ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
> All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
> for doing this. ...
_
I wrote (9 Jul 2006 17:40:06 -0700):
> Edward Winter?

_
Sam Sloan apparently does not want to discuss the notion of
Edward Winter supposedly being thankful to Sam Sloan.

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
> ... I posted the campaign biographies of all of the members of
> Bessel Kok's team that was running for FIDE election.
>_
> Because of the efforts principally of Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg,
> the biographies of the candidates for FIDE Election were repeatedly
> deleted.
_
I reproduced (9 Jul 2006 17:40:06 -0700)
some Wikipedia quotes:
> "... Sloan recently took it on himself to campaign for Bessel
> Kok's slate of candidates in the upcoming FIDE election
> (http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/14c509552b9798be).
> He put a biography of Panupand Vijjuprabha (one of Kok's team) on
> Wikipedia, that was an obvious campaign piece that included stuff
> like Vijjuprabha's phone number. I felt this was non-notable so I
> made an AfD nomination to get community opinion
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Panupand_Vijjuprabha).
> I then noticed the article was pasted verbatim from Kok's group's
> web site
> (http://www.rightmove06.org/index.php?set_language=en&cccpage=articleview&set_z_articles=62)
> without attribution, so I noted that (and gave the link) in the AfD.
> The bio was speedied as a copyvio a few minutes later.
>_
> ... Sloan copied several more bios from the same source over the next
> hour. I entered SD requests for these, giving the source links
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions&oldid=44761556#Deletion_of_Articles).
> These too were speedied (Ali Nihat Yazici, Julio C=C3=A9sar Ingolotti,
> and Geoffrey Borg). I also briefly put up a SD request for Bessel Kok
> (mentioning his higher notability), but I then saw that Kok's bio
> contained a mixture of copied and non-copied material, so I took
> down my SD request and edited out the copied material. Except for
> Kok and Yazici, these people are non-notable (a few hundred
> Google hits at most). ..." - Paul Rubin (05:41, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_
>_
> "... I commend to Sam Sloan the following:
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox).
> I do not believe I am alone in seeing strong evidence of Sam Sloan
> extending to his Wikipedia contributions the strong agenda he has
> outside of Wikipedia. The solution is not for those who disagree with
> Sloan to stop editing, it's for Sloan to stop adding tendentious
> content. And Sam, sometimes when everybody tells you that you
> are wrong, it's because you are wrong." - [Guy Chapman]
> (10:18, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (Mon, 10 Jul 2006 09:30:22 GMT):
> The above quotes are perfect examples of how Louis Blair,
> Ralf Callenberg and Paul Rubin interfered in the FIDE
> Election in Turin, Italy and helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
> re-elected.
>_
> Perhaps Kirsan should award his traditional bribe of a Rolex Watch to
> those such as Louis Blair, Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg who use
> underhanded means to help get him elected.

_
The ONLY quote of me up there is: "Edward Winter?"
_
Sam Sloan does not explain what is "underhanded" about it. Nor
does he explain how a note, posted after the election, could have
"helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected."



  
Date: 11 Jul 2006 15:54:57
From: George Orwell
Subject: I would never play 26. .. d3 here
On 10 Jul 2006 04:12:01 -0700, [email protected] (Louis Blair) wrote:

>Sam Sloan ([email protected])
>(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
>wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
>> ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
>> All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
>> for doing this. ...
>_
>I wrote (9 Jul 2006 17:40:06 -0700):
>> Edward Winter?
>
>_
>Sam Sloan apparently does not want to discuss the notion of
>Edward Winter supposedly being thankful to Sam Sloan.

Louis Blair apparently wants to converse with the fake Sam Sloan, rather
than with Sam Sloan, despite having been repeatedly provided with a way of
determining that it is the fake Sam Sloan with whom he is conversing.

Is this because Louis Blair made a mistake? Louis Blair makes many
mistakes. Most people think that Louis Blair himself was and is a mistake.

No, it is no mistake. And Louis Blair wants us to know it was not a mistake
because above you can see he posted the NMTP-Posting Host of the forger
(who has temporarily given up forging my ishipress.com email address and is
using gmail which is from google.com) when he was replying to the forger.

The forged messages from gmail go back a long time, and were in general
much better than the easily detected nonsense posted by
[email protected] and [email protected]. I used to ignore all of them
as a matter of policy. In fact it was quite convenient for me, in one way,
that these forgers or this forger existed.

So why is Louis Blair responding to forgeries as if they are from me?

He is clearly not the forger himself, as it is well known that he can
barely play chess and probably would struggle even beating Howcheng in 20
moves. All Louis Blair can do is provide long posts filled with what other
people might or might not have written a long time ago.

But then Louis Blair often operates in league with Wlod H, a fake poster
who writes in the same way that the other fake poster Calvin Abu Qusz used
to write.

Kirsan hasn't sent Louis Blair a Rolex Watch (though he should). Maybe
Louis Blair wears a Rolex. Where did Louis Blair get the Rolex he may be
wearing? The answer to that could tell us who is behind all this. Will
Louis Blair tell us exactly where he got the Rolex he may be wearing?

Obviously, the reason that Louis Blair wants us to know that he know that
the message is forged but is still responding to it may mean that Louis
Blair also wants the forger to be caught, and knows or suspects who is the
forger, but won't do it directly. The answer is somewhere in the IPs of the
Wiki-vandals, though Callenberg is also too weak to have come up with

I checked the "IP" in some of my recent emails from Tom Dorsch and they
are from central California, which means he has moved, which is unlikely
given what his wife does, or is trying to hide something. I wonder what Tom
Dorsch may be trying to hide. He is very good at hiding things. Depending
on where he is standing, he can hide the whole Golden Gate Bridge.

A clue is in one of the fake games he posted.
[Event "4 Rated Games Tonight"]
[Site "shall Chess Club, NYC"]
[Date "2006.04.13"]
[Round "04"]
[White "Ginzburg, Anna"]
[Black "Sloan, Sam"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C40"]
[WhiteElo "1747"]
[BlackElo "1938"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Be2 e4 6.Nd4 c5 7.Nc2 Nc6
8.O-O f5 9.d3 Nf6 10.c4 Qe6 11.Nc3 Bd6 12.dxe4 fxe4 13.Ne3 O-O
14.Nb5 Be5 15.Nd5 Qf7 16.Rb1 Be6 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Be3 Nd4 19.b3
Rad8 20.Qe1 a6 21.Nxd4 cxd4 22.Bd2 Qh4 23.f4 Qxe1 24.Rbxe1 Bd6
25.a4 Rd7 26.Rc1 e3 27.Be1 Bxf4 28.Bb4 Rff7 29.Rcd1 b6 30.g3 Be5
31.Rxf7 Bxf7 32.Bd3 a5 33.Be1 Bh5 34.Rb1 Kf7 35.b4 Bg6 36.Rb3 0-1

I don't know how he knows I know Anna Ginzburg well enough or that she is
really much stronger than her rating suggests, but I am going to check if
she was actually at the shall that day, for if she was, that forger too
was at the shall or knows someone who was at the shall that day.

The game itself is quite plausible and many girls are so terrified of the
Damiano that they play weak moves like 3. c3 to avoid it, even though
white's position is then lost. The made-up moves are not malicious except
for one thing. I would never, ever play 26. .. e3. It is the wrong pawn. It
is obviously the wrong pawn. Even skittles players would know the e-pawn is
the wrong pawn and that 26. .. d3 is moving the right pawn. It is the right
pawn because after the bishop on e2 is immediately forced to move I can get
right through white's defences and check her with 27 .. Bc5+ at which point
the game is over. With an opponent like Anna, such an opportunity would be
one I doubly would not miss. Anyone can see 26. .. d3 also wins but it wins
grindingly and boringly in the way that Maurice Ashley might win. Bobby
Fischer would play 26. .. d3. Even Jim Eade would play 26. .. d3, even if
the only reason was that the black rook was on that file. Only a greedy
pawn-odds player would play 26. .. e3 because the fact that it allows black
to capture the pawn on f4 (by deflecting the bishop on d2 that was
defending it) attracts a greedy pawn-odds player. A player like me knows
that the f pawn is not important, if needed it can be won later, and the
central black pawns and the attack on white's queen will decide the game
long before there is time to waste winning the f-pawn.

Do not think that is no use wondering what motivates the forger. While the
game is malicious because it makes me seem as if I play like Maurice Ashley
and not like Bobby Fischer, that is too subtle for the likes of Ralf
Callenberg, Louis Blair, Neil Bernnen or for most of the voters whom one
might think the forger was trying to influence. So if he (or she) is being
malicious they are not being competent at being malicious. That he is
competent at being a forger does not mean for sure he is competent at being
malicious but it suggests that he is not malicious and so is not a he.

It could therefore be that the forger and stalker is one of the beautiful
and very intelligent mischievous ladies whom I have mated but whom I have
not taken to bed. Regretably I have never mated Anna Ginzburg, though I
knew it was not her already who is behind the forgeries.

I will definitely put up a page about the Damiano forgeries, though.

The Real Sam Sloan

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



   
Date: 12 Jul 2006 14:35:11
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: I would never play 26. .. e3 here
What happened is truly, really strange, and I wonder if anyone here can
explain it. I posted a reply to Louis Blair who, in order to provoke me so
he can post, five years later, still more out of context material, is
deliberately conversing with a forger. Within minutes of my post being
sent, someone must have cancelled it, because it never got into google or
anywhere else. I don't know how these things are done but I know they can
be done.

Then 2 days later my post appears, with the name of the sender changed to
"George Orwell", who it is well known is dead and is not me.

More sinister is the fact that the post was mutilated in several places,
notably random changes to d3 and e3, to make as if I cannot play chess.

I am going to post the original that I sent here and see if anyone can tell
me what the differences or mutilations signify, how it was done and whether
anyone saw the original. If no one did, that means twistycreek is no longer
effective as while it cannot be forged it can't post either. If anyone can
give me a plausible answer then I will recommend that they receive a Rolex
Watch from Kirsan for services to chess.

Does anyone know if Callenberg is able to write perfectly in English
(except for changing the place where I put "already" in the last paragraph,
which is a typical Germanic positioning)? Judging by what I have seen, the
answer is no, but then Callenberg could be pretending he cannot write well
in English so that I thought that he was not the forger. His chess is good
enough to have forged those Damiano games. So Callenberg and Blair together
could have hatched this up between them, in order to help Kirsan defeat
Bessel Kok. If not for the chess, it could be Louis Blair on his own,
trying to seem as if he is German.

The forgery is the post which this post replies to. Below is the original
post as I sent and which was mutilated by the forger or someone else.
"George Orwell" claimed to write what is below but it was written by me and
all that "George Orwell" did was interfere with the transmission of my post
somehow and mutilate what I wrote, and give himself an opportunity to reply
as "Sam Sloan" pointing out that what "George Orwell" wrote is fake, which
in a way

On 10 Jul 2006 04:12:01 -0700, [email protected] (Louis Blair) wrote:

>Sam Sloan ([email protected])
>(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
>wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
>> ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
>> All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
>> for doing this. ...
>_
>I wrote (9 Jul 2006 17:40:06 -0700):
>> Edward Winter?
>
>_
>Sam Sloan apparently does not want to discuss the notion of
>Edward Winter supposedly being thankful to Sam Sloan.

Louis Blair apparently wants to converse with the fake Sam Sloan, rather
than with Sam Sloan, despite having been repeatedly provided with a way of
determining that it is the fake Sam Sloan with whom he is conversing.

Is this because Louis Blair made a mistake? Louis Blair makes many
mistakes. Most people think that Louis Blair himself was and is a mistake.

No, it is no mistake. And Louis Blair wants us to know it was not a mistake
because above you can see he posted the NMTP-Posting Host of the forger
(who has temporarily given up forging my ishipress.com email address and is
using gmail which is from google.com) when he was replying to the forger.

The forged messages from gmail go back a long time, and were in general
much better than the easily detected nonsense posted by
[email protected] and [email protected]. I used to ignore all of them
as a matter of policy. In fact it was quite convenient for me, in one way,
that these forgers or this forger existed.

So why is Louis Blair responding to forgeries as if they are from me?

He is clearly not the forger himself, as it is well known that he can
barely play chess and probably would struggle even beating Howcheng in 20
moves. All Louis Blair can do is provide long posts filled with what other
people might or might not have written a long time ago.

But then Louis Blair often operates in league with Wlod H, a fake poster
who writes in the same way that the other fake poster Calvin Abu Qusz used
to write.

Kirsan hasn't sent Louis Blair a Rolex Watch (though he should). Maybe
Louis Blair wears a Rolex. Where did Louis Blair get the Rolex he may be
wearing? The answer to that could tell us who is behind all this. Will
Louis Blair tell us exactly where he got the Rolex he may be wearing?

Obviously, the reason that Louis Blair wants us to know that he knows that
the message is forged but is still responding to it may mean that Louis
Blair also wants the forger to be caught, and knows or suspects who is the
forger, but won't do it directly. The answer is somewhere in the IPs of the
Wiki-vandals, though Callenberg is also too weak to have come up with this
idea on his own. The fake chess games may have been his, though.

I checked the "IP" in some of my recent emails from Tom Dorsch and they are
from central California, which means he has moved, which is unlikely given
what his wife does, or is trying to hide something. I wonder what Tom
Dorsch may be trying to hide. He is very good at hiding things. Depending
on where he is standing, he can hide the whole Golden Gate Bridge.

A clue is in one of the fake games he posted.
[Event "4 Rated Games Tonight"]
[Site "shall Chess Club, NYC"]
[Date "2006.04.13"]
[Round "04"]
[White "Ginzburg, Anna"]
[Black "Sloan, Sam"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C40"]
[WhiteElo "1747"]
[BlackElo "1938"]

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 f6 3.c3 d5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Be2 e4 6.Nd4 c5 7.Nc2 Nc6
8.O-O f5 9.d3 Nf6 10.c4 Qe6 11.Nc3 Bd6 12.dxe4 fxe4 13.Ne3 O-O
14.Nb5 Be5 15.Nd5 Qf7 16.Rb1 Be6 17.Nxf6+ Qxf6 18.Be3 Nd4 19.b3
Rad8 20.Qe1 a6 21.Nxd4 cxd4 22.Bd2 Qh4 23.f4 Qxe1 24.Rbxe1 Bd6
25.a4 Rd7 26.Rc1 e3 27.Be1 Bxf4 28.Bb4 Rff7 29.Rcd1 b6 30.g3 Be5
31.Rxf7 Bxf7 32.Bd3 a5 33.Be1 Bh5 34.Rb1 Kf7 35.b4 Bg6 36.Rb3 0-1

I don't know how he knows I know Anna Ginzburg well enough or that she is
really much stronger than her rating suggests, but I am going to check if
she was actually at the shall that day, for if she was, that forger too
was at the shall or knows someone who was at the shall that day.

The game itself is quite plausible and many girls are so terrified of the
Damiano that they play weak moves like 3. c3 to avoid it, even though
white's position is then lost. The made-up moves are not malicious except
for one thing. I would never, ever play 26. .. e3. It is the wrong pawn. It
is obviously the wrong pawn. Even skittles players would know the e-pawn is
the wrong pawn and that 26. .. d3 is moving the right pawn. It is the right
pawn because after the bishop on e2 is immediately forced to move I can get
right through white's defences and check her with 27 .. Bc5+ at which point
the game is over. With an opponent like Anna, such an opportunity would be
one I doubly would not miss. Anyone can see 26. .. e3 also wins but it wins
grindingly and boringly in the way that Maurice Ashley might win. Bobby
Fischer would play 26. .. d3. Even Jim Eade would play 26. .. d3, even if
the only reason was that the black rook was on that file. Only a greedy
pawn-odds player would play 26. .. e3 because the fact that it allows black
to capture the pawn on f4 (by deflecting the bishop on d2 that was
defending it) attracts a greedy pawn-odds player. A player like me knows
that the f pawn is not important, if needed it can be won later, and the
central black pawns and the attack on white's queen will decide the game
long before there is time to waste winning the f-pawn.

Do not think that is no use wondering what motivates the forger. While the
game is malicious because it makes me seem as if I play like Maurice Ashley
and not like Bobby Fischer, that is too subtle for the likes of Ralf
Callenberg, Louis Blair, Neil Bernnen or for most of the voters whom one
might think the forger was trying to influence. So if he (or she) is being
malicious they are not being competent at being malicious. That he is
competent at being a forger does not mean for sure he is competent at being
malicious but it suggests that he is not malicious and so is not a he.

It could therefore be that the forger and stalker is one of the beautiful
and very intelligent mischievous ladies whom I have mated but whom I have
not taken to bed. Regretably I have never mated Anna Ginzburg, though I
knew already it was not her who is behind the forgeries.

I will definitely put up a page about the Damiano forgeries, though.

The Real Sam Sloan

-=-
This message was sent via two or more anonymous remailing services.





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com



  
Date: 10 Jul 2006 12:08:53
From: Blind Frank
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
X-No-archive: yes

"Louis Blair" <Nor does he explain how a note, posted after the election,
could have
> "helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected.">

Even though you only wrote a note after the election, it was your attitude
before the election that swung the crucial votes.




 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 22:34:50
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski wrote (9 Jul 2006 00:37:23 -0700):
> Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!
_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
> Kindly explain why you think that my posting of chess biographies
> on Wikipedia was "disgusting".
_
I wrote (9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700):
> I, of course, can not speak for Wlodzimierz Holsztynski, but
> I might be able to provide some useful information. Here is the
> first time that I saw Wlodzimierz Holsztynski express disapproval
> of Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity:
>_
> "[Sam Sloan's] idiotic text about Edward Winter,
> ... should be disregarded immediately, offhand,
> without wasting time." - Wlodzimierz Holsztynski
> (6 2006 03:34:25 -0800)
>_
> Some sample ridiculous statements from the Sam Sloan text
> (posted here, Fri, 03 2006 16:46:37 GMT):
> _
> (1) "For the past more than 30 years, every time a new book
> by Keene has come out or a new article by Keene has been
> published, Edward Winter has written articles attacking it."
>_
> (2) "Kingston is from the same part of England that Winter is
> believed to be from."
>_
> (3) "Edward Winter filed an ethics complaint with the FIDE
> Congress accusing Keene of unethical conduct in writing
> books almost exclusively about opening theory, whereas
> Winter said there should be more books about chess history."
>_
> (4) "Keene's opponent was Florencio Campomanes who
> Winter supported."
>_
> (5) "Chess Notes ... contains brief commentaries usually not
> more than one or two paragraphs in length attacking usually
> insignificant errors and spelling mistakes made by this or that
> chess writer."
>_
> (6) "If a book by Keene contains a spelling mistake, Chess
> Notes will point it out."
>_
> "Wow, I didn't know that ... San Diego, California
> (where I was born and lived until 1980) [is] part of
> England." - Taylor Kingston (3 2006
> 11:25:28 -0800)
>_
> http://www.chesshistory.com/

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 19:42:49 -0700):

> Thank you for providing a list of quotes of statements I have made
> in years past.
>_
> Now that you have done this, kindly explain which, if any, of these
> statements you believe to be untrue and, if so, why?
>_
> Please provide any evidence you have that any of these statements
> are untrue.
>_
> For example, if you believe that Raymond Keene has ever written
> a book that was not attacked by Edward Winter, please provide the
> name of the book.
>_
> Finally, kindly inform us of whether or not you are a personal witness
> to the events that you are disputing and, if not, provide the names of
> the witnesses upon which you are relying.

_
Sam Sloan seems to have failed to keep in mind how Wikipedia
works. As a reminder:
_
"Even if Sam Sloan were the authority he takes himself
to be, that would cut no special ice on Wikipedia.
Unsourced gossip being cut is a good thing, as Sam
should note well." - Charles Matthews
(18:03, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095
_
_
"... Please read the content at the following links very
carefully:
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
_
... Until you can prove all of these claims, they have no
business being in the article. Wikipedia is not a forum for you
to write articles chock full of your own opinions, speculations,
and rants. ..." - Howard Cheng (22:30, 3 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Edward_G._Winter
_
In my 9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700 note (reproduced above), I provided
a link to Chess Notes so that people can get an idea about some
of these matters (especially, "(5)").



  
Date: 10 Jul 2006 09:57:18
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
On 9 Jul 2006 22:34:50 -0700, "Louis Blair" <[email protected] >
wrote:


> "... Please read the content at the following links very
>carefully:
>_
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_your_sources
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view
>_
> ... Until you can prove all of these claims, they have no
> business being in the article. Wikipedia is not a forum for you
> to write articles chock full of your own opinions, speculations,
> and rants. ..." - Howard Cheng (22:30, 3 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Edward_G._Winter
>_
>In my 9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700 note (reproduced above), I provided
>a link to Chess Notes so that people can get an idea about some
>of these matters (especially, "(5)").
>

Good. Thank you Louis Blair for providing proof that you are full of
it.

First, look at the pages about Verifiability on Wikipedia that you
cite above. One of them states:

"If you are familiar with the subject matter, please check for
inaccuracies and modify as needed, citing sources."

That means that to change the content of one of my pages YOU need to
cite sources. Neither you nor Howard Cheng have the authority under
Wikipedia rules to massively delete and vandalize anything I write
unless you are familiar with the subject matter.

Howard Cheng admitted in his postings that he has played only one game
of chess in his life and knows nothing of the subject matter.
Therefore, he did not have the right to remove my content.

Now, going to the page you cite above, it says:

Attention Sam Sloan

Like I asked you previously on Talk:Chess Life, please cite your
sources. Some examples:

* "In a radio broadcast from the Philippines in 2003, Bobby
Fischer expressed the opinion that Edward Winter does not exist."
What's the date of the broadcast? What station? Where can one read a
transcript?
* "However, one reviewer notes: 'His attention to the most
insignificant detail is more than apparent. . . . '" Who said this?
Where and when was it published?
* "ChessCafe' and Hanon Russell Enterprises stopped publishing
anything by Winter and apparently removed the book reviews by Winter
from the archives." Where is this documented?
* "New In Chess magazine had carried Chess Notes, subject to the
strict condition that Winter not say anything about Keene." Where is
this claim published? Is it in the magazine? What's the issue number,
the date, the pages?
* "Nowadays, no chess magazine in the world is willing to publish
Chess Notes." Where is this documented?



Obviously, Howard Cheng, who wrote the above words, has no knowledge
of this subject, as he himself admits. However, you, Louis Blair, seem
to have some knowledge about chess.

Are you disputing any of the above factual statements?

For example, do you dispute the fact that "* "In a radio broadcast
from the Philippines in 2003, Bobby Fischer expressed the opinion that
Edward Winter does not exist."

If you are disputing that, then obviously you have not played the
tapes, which are available on Bobby Fischer's own website. Why bother
us with your own nonsense if you are not willing to do basic research?

Are you disputing the fact that " * "However, one reviewer notes:
'His attention to the most insignificant detail is more than apparent.
. . . ' If so, why not dop a two second Google search, and you will
find this quote? If you are not willing to spend two seconds, why do
you waste our time by making us read your lengthy crap.

Next item: " * "ChessCafe' and Hanon Russell Enterprises stopped
publishing anything by Winter and apparently removed the book reviews
by Winter from the archives." Where is this documented?" Where is this
documented? Are you blind, dumb or both? Go look at chesscafe.com and
see for yourself.

And so on.

Why do you have this irksome habit of providing long lists of quotes
of others without providing anything original yourselt?

Sam Sloan


   
Date: 10 Jul 2006 12:10:56
From: Blind Frank
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
X-No-archive: yes

"Sam Sloan" < > Obviously, Howard Cheng, who wrote the above words, has no
knowledge of this subject, as he himself admits. >

Most of those Wikipedia Editors (all volunteer work-force for a
billion-dollar company) are handicapped, wheel-chair bound shut-ins who can
spend all day at the Wikipedia website working for free so that the
stock-holders continue to reap millions in profits.

What a bunch of losers.




 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 20:50:47
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski wrote (9 Jul 2006 00:37:23 -0700):
> Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!
_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
> Kindly explain why you think that my posting of chess biographies
> on Wikipedia was "disgusting".
_
I wrote (9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700):
> I, of course, can not speak for Wlodzimierz Holsztynski, but
> I might be able to provide some useful information. Here is the
> first time that I saw Wlodzimierz Holsztynski express disapproval
> of Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity:
>_
> "[Sam Sloan's] idiotic text about Edward Winter,
> ... should be disregarded immediately, offhand,
> without wasting time." - Wlodzimierz Holsztynski
> (6 2006 03:34:25 -0800)
>_
> Some sample ridiculous statements from the Sam Sloan text
> (posted here, Fri, 03 2006 16:46:37 GMT):
> _
> (1) "For the past more than 30 years, every time a new book
> by Keene has come out or a new article by Keene has been
> published, Edward Winter has written articles attacking it."
>_
> (2) "Kingston is from the same part of England that Winter is
> believed to be from."
>_
> (3) "Edward Winter filed an ethics complaint with the FIDE
> Congress accusing Keene of unethical conduct in writing
> books almost exclusively about opening theory, whereas
> Winter said there should be more books about chess history."
>_
> (4) "Keene's opponent was Florencio Campomanes who
> Winter supported."
>_
> (5) "Chess Notes ... contains brief commentaries usually not
> more than one or two paragraphs in length attacking usually
> insignificant errors and spelling mistakes made by this or that
> chess writer."
>_
> (6) "If a book by Keene contains a spelling mistake, Chess
> Notes will point it out."
>_
> "Wow, I didn't know that ... San Diego, California
> (where I was born and lived until 1980) [is] part of
> England." - Taylor Kingston (3 2006
> 11:25:28 -0800)
>_
> http://www.chesshistory.com/

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 19:42:49 -0700):

> Thank you for providing a list of quotes of statements I have made
> in years past.
>_
> Now that you have done this, kindly explain which, if any, of these
> statements you believe to be untrue and, if so, why?
>_
> Please provide any evidence you have that any of these statements
> are untrue.
>_
> For example, if you believe that Raymond Keene has ever written
> a book that was not attacked by Edward Winter, please provide the
> name of the book.
>_
> Finally, kindly inform us of whether or not you are a personal witness
> to the events that you are disputing and, if not, provide the names of
> the witnesses upon which you are relying.

_
Sam Sloan seems to have failed to keep in mind how Wikipedia
works. As a reminder:
_
"Even if Sam Sloan were the authority he takes himself
to be, that would cut no special ice on Wikipedia.
Unsourced gossip being cut is a good thing, as Sam
should note well." - Charles Matthews
(18:03, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
In my 9 Jul 2006 18:47:01 -0700 note (reproduced above), I provided
a link to Chess Notes so that people can get an idea about some
of these matters.



 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 19:42:49
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Louis Blair wrote:
> Wlodzimierz Holsztynski wrote (9 Jul 2006 00:37:23 -0700):
> > Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!
>
> _
> Sam Sloan ([email protected])
> (NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
> wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
>
> > Kindly explain why you think that my posting of chess biographies
> > on Wikipedia was "disgusting".
>
> _
> I, of course, can not speak for Wlodzimierz Holsztynski, but
> I might be able to provide some useful information. Here is the
> first time that I saw Wlodzimierz Holsztynski express disapproval
> of Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity:
> _
> "[Sam Sloan's] idiotic text about Edward Winter,
> ... should be disregarded immediately, offhand,
> without wasting time." - Wlodzimierz Holsztynski
> (6 2006 03:34:25 -0800)
> _
> Some sample ridiculous statements from the Sam Sloan text
> (posted here, Fri, 03 2006 16:46:37 GMT):
> _
> (1) "For the past more than 30 years, every time a new book
> by Keene has come out or a new article by Keene has been
> published, Edward Winter has written articles attacking it."
> _
> (2) "Kingston is from the same part of England that Winter is
> believed to be from."
> _
> (3) "Edward Winter filed an ethics complaint with the FIDE
> Congress accusing Keene of unethical conduct in writing
> books almost exclusively about opening theory, whereas
> Winter said there should be more books about chess history."
> _
> (4) "Keene's opponent was Florencio Campomanes who
> Winter supported."
> _
> (5) "Chess Notes ... contains brief commentaries usually not
> more than one or two paragraphs in length attacking usually
> insignificant errors and spelling mistakes made by this or that
> chess writer."
> _
> (6) "If a book by Keene contains a spelling mistake, Chess
> Notes will point it out."
> _
> "Wow, I didn't know that ... San Diego, California
> (where I was born and lived until 1980) [is] part of
> England." - Taylor Kingston (3 2006
> 11:25:28 -0800)
> _
> http://www.chesshistory.com/

Thank you for providing a list of quotes of statements I have made in
years past.

Now that you have done this, kindly explain which, if any, of these
statements you believe to be untrue and, if so, why?

Please provide any evidence you have that any of these statements are
untrue.

For example, if you believe that Raymond Keene has ever written a book
that was not attacked by Edward Winter, please provide the name of the
book.

Finally, kindly inform us of whether or not you are a personal witness
to the events that you are disputing and, if not, provide the names of
the witnesses upon which you are relying.

Sam Sloan



 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 19:24:15
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Some quotes from the Tom Dorsch article can
be found in my 21 2006 22:06:10 -0800
reproduction of part of a Wikipedia discussion.
(See the "Comment by JzG".)
_
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.misc/msg/2624e352e6e399b1?hl=en
_
For more of the discussion, see
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tom_Dorsch
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=39178616&oldid=39171201
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADeletion_review&diff=43217170&oldid=43215421
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095



 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 18:47:01
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski wrote (9 Jul 2006 00:37:23 -0700):
> Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!

_
Sam Sloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):

> Kindly explain why you think that my posting of chess biographies
> on Wikipedia was "disgusting".

_
I, of course, can not speak for Wlodzimierz Holsztynski, but
I might be able to provide some useful information. Here is the
first time that I saw Wlodzimierz Holsztynski express disapproval
of Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity:
_
"[Sam Sloan's] idiotic text about Edward Winter,
... should be disregarded immediately, offhand,
without wasting time." - Wlodzimierz Holsztynski
(6 2006 03:34:25 -0800)
_
Some sample ridiculous statements from the Sam Sloan text
(posted here, Fri, 03 2006 16:46:37 GMT):
_
(1) "For the past more than 30 years, every time a new book
by Keene has come out or a new article by Keene has been
published, Edward Winter has written articles attacking it."
_
(2) "Kingston is from the same part of England that Winter is
believed to be from."
_
(3) "Edward Winter filed an ethics complaint with the FIDE
Congress accusing Keene of unethical conduct in writing
books almost exclusively about opening theory, whereas
Winter said there should be more books about chess history."
_
(4) "Keene's opponent was Florencio Campomanes who
Winter supported."
_
(5) "Chess Notes ... contains brief commentaries usually not
more than one or two paragraphs in length attacking usually
insignificant errors and spelling mistakes made by this or that
chess writer."
_
(6) "If a book by Keene contains a spelling mistake, Chess
Notes will point it out."
_
"Wow, I didn't know that ... San Diego, California
(where I was born and lived until 1980) [is] part of
England." - Taylor Kingston (3 2006
11:25:28 -0800)
_
http://www.chesshistory.com/



 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 18:23:30
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Randy Bauer wrote:

> Typical Sloan bullshit. I'm sure that Tom Dorsch is one of the "all of the
> people" who is thankful for Sloan "doing this." Sloan's portrayal of Dorsch
> wouldn't, in anybody else but Sloan's deranged mind, be seen as positive
> toward Tom.
>
> Randy Bauer

Why not? Dorsch sends me emails several times a week and he has never
complained about my biography of him on Wikipedia.

If he did not like it, he could easily have had one of his friends
modify it to his satisfaction.

Instead, it was deleted based in part on your input and his chance for
15 minutes of fame was lost.

Sam Sloan



  
Date: 10 Jul 2006 01:42:53
From: Blind Frank
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
X-No-archive: yes

"samsloan" <it was deleted based in part on your input and his chance for
> 15 minutes of fame was lost.
>

Too bad that none of the blowhards that bitch about you ever do anything
positive themselves.




   
Date: 10 Jul 2006 03:02:47
From: Randy Bauer
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

"Blind Frank" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> X-No-archive: yes
>
> "samsloan" <it was deleted based in part on your input and his chance for
>> 15 minutes of fame was lost.
>>
>
> Too bad that none of the blowhards that bitch about you ever do anything
> positive themselves.

Get a room.




    
Date: 09 Jul 2006 22:51:14
From: Dane
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

"Randy Bauer" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:rrjsg.1071684$xm3.991939@attbi_s21...
>
> "Blind Frank" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > X-No-archive: yes
> >
> > "samsloan" <it was deleted based in part on your input and his chance
for
> >> 15 minutes of fame was lost.
> >>
> >
> > Too bad that none of the blowhards that bitch about you ever do anything
> > positive themselves.
>
> Get a room.
>
>

Can't take the heat, eh? Interesting.



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


    
Date: 10 Jul 2006 03:45:09
From: Blind Frank
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
X-No-archive: yes

"Randy Bauer" < > Get a room.
>
>
Even Sam Sloan has friends. That in itself should be a reassurance to
everyone. You should applaud those of us who see the light that is Sam, not
just the darkness.




 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 17:40:06
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
samsloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):

> ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
> All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
> for doing this. ...

_
Edward Winter?

_
samsloan ([email protected])
(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):

> ... I posted the campaign biographies of all of the members of
> Bessel Kok's team that was running for FIDE election.
>_
> Because of the efforts principally of Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg,
> the biographies of the candidates for FIDE Election were repeatedly
> deleted.

_
"... Sloan recently took it on himself to campaign for Bessel
Kok's slate of candidates in the upcoming FIDE election

(http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/14c509552b9798be).
He put a biography of Panupand Vijjuprabha (one of Kok's team) on
Wikipedia, that was an obvious campaign piece that included stuff
like Vijjuprabha's phone number. I felt this was non-notable so I
made an AfD nomination to get community opinion

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Panupand_Vijjuprabha).
I then noticed the article was pasted verbatim from Kok's group's
web site

(http://www.rightmove06.org/index.php?set_language=en&cccpage=articleview&set_z_articles=62)
without attribution, so I noted that (and gave the link) in the AfD.
The bio was speedied as a copyvio a few minutes later.
_
... Sloan copied several more bios from the same source over the next
hour. I entered SD requests for these, giving the source links

(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions&oldid=44761556#Deletion_of_Articles).
These too were speedied (Ali Nihat Yazici, Julio C=C3=A9sar Ingolotti,
and Geoffrey Borg). I also briefly put up a SD request for Bessel Kok
(mentioning his higher notability), but I then saw that Kok's bio
contained a mixture of copied and non-copied material, so I took
down my SD request and edited out the copied material. Except for
Kok and Yazici, these people are non-notable (a few hundred
Google hits at most). ..." - Paul Rubin (05:41, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
"... I commend to Sam Sloan the following:
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox).
I do not believe I am alone in seeing strong evidence of Sam Sloan
extending to his Wikipedia contributions the strong agenda he has
outside of Wikipedia. The solution is not for those who disagree with
Sloan to stop editing, it's for Sloan to stop adding tendentious
content. And Sam, sometimes when everybody tells you that you
are wrong, it's because you are wrong." - Just zis Guy you know?
(10:18, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095



  
Date: 10 Jul 2006 09:30:22
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
On 9 Jul 2006 17:40:06 -0700, "Louis Blair" <[email protected] >
wrote:

>samsloan ([email protected])
>(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
>wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
>
>> ... I posted about 100 biographies of chess players to Wikipedia.
>> All of the people that I wrote biographies of are thankful to me
>> for doing this. ...
>
>_
>Edward Winter?
>
>_
>samsloan ([email protected])
>(NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.199.110.255)
>wrote (9 Jul 2006 05:41:14 -0700):
>
>> ... I posted the campaign biographies of all of the members of
>> Bessel Kok's team that was running for FIDE election.
>>_
>> Because of the efforts principally of Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg,
>> the biographies of the candidates for FIDE Election were repeatedly
>> deleted.
>
>_
> "... Sloan recently took it on himself to campaign for Bessel
> Kok's slate of candidates in the upcoming FIDE election
>
>(http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.chess.politics/msg/14c509552b9798be).
> He put a biography of Panupand Vijjuprabha (one of Kok's team) on
> Wikipedia, that was an obvious campaign piece that included stuff
> like Vijjuprabha's phone number. I felt this was non-notable so I
> made an AfD nomination to get community opinion
>
>(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Panupand_Vijjuprabha).
> I then noticed the article was pasted verbatim from Kok's group's
> web site
>
>(http://www.rightmove06.org/index.php?set_language=en&cccpage=articleview&set_z_articles=62)
> without attribution, so I noted that (and gave the link) in the AfD.
> The bio was speedied as a copyvio a few minutes later.
>_
> ... Sloan copied several more bios from the same source over the next
> hour. I entered SD requests for these, giving the source links
>
>(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Speedy_deletions&oldid=44761556#Deletion_of_Articles).
> These too were speedied (Ali Nihat Yazici, Julio C=C3=A9sar Ingolotti,
> and Geoffrey Borg). I also briefly put up a SD request for Bessel Kok
> (mentioning his higher notability), but I then saw that Kok's bio
> contained a mixture of copied and non-copied material, so I took
> down my SD request and edited out the copied material. Except for
> Kok and Yazici, these people are non-notable (a few hundred
> Google hits at most). ..." - Paul Rubin (05:41, 21 ch 2006 (UTC))
>_

The above quotes are perfect examples of how Louis Blair, Ralf
Callenberg and Paul Rubin interfered in the FIDE Election in Turin,
Italy and helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected.

Perhaps Kirsan should award his traditional bribe of a Rolex Watch to
those such as Louis Blair, Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg who use
underhanded means to help get him elected.

Sam Sloan


   
Date: 10 Jul 2006 12:07:34
From: Blind Frank
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
"Sam Sloan" < > Perhaps Kirsan should award his traditional bribe of a Rolex
Watch to those such as Louis Blair, Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg who use
underhanded means to help get him elected. >

If he's handing out watches, then I hope he will recognize my contribution,
whatever it was.




  
Date: 10 Jul 2006 00:58:10
From: Blind Frank
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
X-No-archive: yes

"Louis Blair" < > Edward Winter?>

He meant to do Edgar Winter, the jazz/blues/rock guitarist who also plays
correspondence Chess and has beaten off Sam many times.




 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 10:24:27
From:
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

samsloan wrote:
>
> Then a few of my regular critics here started going over to Wikipedia
> and attacking me there. Principal among these were Louis Blair, Paul
> Rubin, Ralf Callenberg, Neil Bernnen and Bill Brock.

"Neil Bernnen?" Even Innes can spell better, it seems.

"Kindly explain" how I attacked you at Wikipedia. I remember responding
to one of your false claims I was another poster. Aside from
corrections to your sloppy Whitaker article, I've not been active on
the site.

Also, "kindly explain" your falsehood that I was banned from Wikipedia.



  
Date: 09 Jul 2006 18:03:47
From: Chess One
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

<[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> samsloan wrote:
>>
>> Then a few of my regular critics here started going over to Wikipedia
>> and attacking me there. Principal among these were Louis Blair, Paul
>> Rubin, Ralf Callenberg, Neil Bernnen and Bill Brock.
>
> "Neil Bernnen?"

A traditional misspelling for those can't write their own names and pose as
others - since they are posessed by fear and shame. Nil Brnnun is such a
one! He is lately joined by Greg Kynnydy another American now writing anon,
who writes non-stop about how other people with actual names can't claim
their own life experiences to be true - as if these guys had any courage at
all to speak their own truth, and own it!

The guys find everything outside their own oevre amusing in the circle-jerk
ward.

Their usual response is not to deny what anyone did, but the cheater ask for
proofs and explanations of their own cheating - as if we are to understand
that this is something that would be resolved if they were caught.

Its not necessary to agree or like any poster here. But we all write as well
as they can - and if this can be incremented by other's knowledge, so be it!
But to deny other people's experience and coyly lie about it by suppressing
the truth, is not only despicable, illegal, but so obvious too!

Phil Innes

> Even Innes can spell better, it seems.
>
> "Kindly explain" how I attacked you at Wikipedia. I remember responding
> to one of your false claims I was another poster. Aside from
> corrections to your sloppy Whitaker article, I've not been active on
> the site.
>
> Also, "kindly explain" your falsehood that I was banned from Wikipedia.
>




 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 05:41:14
From: samsloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:

> Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!
>
> To give a useful institution like Wikipedia a chance
> it is necessary to keep the likes of Sam Sloan as far
> away from it as possible.
>
> Wlod

Kindly explain your statement. I posted about 100 biographies of chess
players to Wikipedia. All of the people that I wrote biographies of are
thankful to me for doing this.

Then a few of my regular critics here started going over to Wikipedia
and attacking me there. Principal among these were Louis Blair, Paul
Rubin, Ralf Callenberg, Neil Bernnen and Bill Brock.

Because of their constant attacks, they succeeded in getting several of
my biographies of chess players deleted.

For example, I posted the campaign biographies of all of the members of
Bessel Kok's team that was running for FIDE election.

Because of the efforts principally of Paul Rubin and Ralf Callenberg,
the biographies of the candidates for FIDE Election were repeatedly
deleted.

This helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected as President of FIDE,
especially since Ralf Callenberg kept deleting all of the well known
negative facts about Kirsan Ilyumzhinov.

In all this time, I did not see you, Wlod, over there.

Kindly explain why you think that my posting of chess biographies on
Wikipedia was "disgusting".

Sam Sloan



  
Date: 10 Jul 2006 01:12:30
From: Randy Bauer
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

"samsloan" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod) wrote:
>
>> Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!
>>
>> To give a useful institution like Wikipedia a chance
>> it is necessary to keep the likes of Sam Sloan as far
>> away from it as possible.
>>
>> Wlod
>
> Kindly explain your statement. I posted about 100 biographies of chess
> players to Wikipedia. All of the people that I wrote biographies of are
> thankful to me for doing this.
\
Typical Sloan bullshit. I'm sure that Tom Dorsch is one of the "all of the
people" who is thankful for Sloan "doing this." Sloan's portrayal of Dorsch
wouldn't, in anybody else but Sloan's deranged mind, be seen as positive
toward Tom.

Randy Bauer




  
Date: 09 Jul 2006 17:24:54
From: Blind Frank
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
X-No-archive: yes

"samsloan" < > This helped get Kirsan Ilyumzhinov re-elected as President of
FIDE,
> especially since Ralf Callenberg kept deleting all of the well known
> negative facts about Kirsan Ilyumzhinov.
>

Wikipedia is shit. I saw a write-up about a major corporation that I know
has a very negative record of judgments against it, and I updated their bio
and the negative information was deleted even though I posted the citations
of Federal Judicial decisions that said that the company had been negligent,
etc. After some hassle, only one sentence that stated that the company had
judgements against it was permitted, without any other details.

Wikipedia blows




 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 00:37:23
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Sol wrote:

> "Louis Blair":
> > One way to get a view of what
> > Sam Sloan is like is to look at
> > the experience that people have had at Wikipedia:
> > [...]
>
> the editors at Wikipedia are a bunch
> of egomaniacal assholes. They do their
> job for free and to exert their influence over others.

Sam Sloan's Wikipedia activity is disgusting!

> Wikipedia is a joke, and garbage. It is facts created by mob rule.

To give a useful institution like Wikipedia a chance
it is necessary to keep the likes of Sam Sloan as far
away from it as possible.

Wlod



 
Date: 09 Jul 2006 00:28:38
From: Wlodzimierz Holsztynski (Wlod)
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

Matt Nemmers wrote another IQ-less post:

> SOLUTION: Stop posting on Usenet. This will eventually stop the
> forgers and will let everyone breathe a sigh of relief that you're
> finally gone for good.

Speak for yourstupidself, Matt, not for "everyone".

Wlod



 
Date: 06 Jul 2006 22:00:44
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Sol wrote (Wed, 05 Jul 2006 19:22:45 GMT):
> Why are you guys so mean to Sam? Do you know him personally?
> He seems like a reasonable person.
_
I wrote (5 Jul 2006 17:43:20 -0700):
> One way to get a view of what Sam Sloan is like is to look at
> the experience that people have had at Wikipedia:
> ...
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chess_Life
> ...
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tom_Dorsch
> ...
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=39178616&oldid=39171201
> ...
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADeletion_review&diff=43217170&oldid=43215421
> ...
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation&oldid=44627462#User:Phr_against_User:Sam_Sloan
> ...
> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095
> ...
_
Snipping ALL of the links I provided,
Sol wrote (Thu, 06 Jul 2006 01:59:15 GMT):
> ... Check the listings for Wiki editors and then visit their personal
> pages. Every single one of the Wiki editors has dozens of complaints
> from various people that they have screwed over arbitrarily. ...
_
I posted (5 Jul 2006 19:25:09 -0700)
a jr quote:
> "Re Wikipedia: Don't take Sam Sloan's
> goofy complaint seriously." - jr
> (16 Apr 2006 11:47:22 -0700)
_
Sol wrote (Thu, 06 Jul 2006 02:45:25 GMT):
> And those guys are running an encyclopedia? What a joke.

_
The jr quote is not from Wikipedia. It is a quote from someone here
who has been promoting the election of Sam Sloan.



 
Date: 05 Jul 2006 19:25:09
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
_
"Re Wikipedia: Don't take Sam Sloan's
goofy complaint seriously." - jr
(16 Apr 2006 11:47:22 -0700)



  
Date: 06 Jul 2006 02:52:23
From: Sol
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
When I used to be on AOL, it was just like Wikipedia. It was run by
"volunteers" who had absolute power to decide what was within the rules.

Not surprisingly, in these "AOL neighborhoods" there were many folks running
non-premium-level commercial websites that were 100% against the rules.
These folks were allowed if they were friends of the "AOL Watch" members.

I did see many NON-commercial websites get deleted if they were indirectly
competing against the commercial websites. People that had free resources
were deleted for violating rules while others who blatantly violated rules
were not deleted.

So when you talk about a very subjective website like Wikipedia; where every
day the content changes based on which editor felt like messing around in a
particular subject; I think it is an abomination to any serious scholarship.
Wikipedia dillutes the credibility of real reference resources, and
Wikipedia is pathetic.




  
Date: 06 Jul 2006 02:45:25
From: Sol
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
"Louis Blair" <"Re Wikipedia: Don't take Sam Sloan's goofy complaint
seriously." - jr
> (16 Apr 2006 11:47:22 -0700)

And those guys are running an encyclopedia? What a joke.




 
Date: 05 Jul 2006 17:43:20
From: Louis Blair
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
One way to get a view of what Sam Sloan is like is to look at
the experience that people have had at Wikipedia:
_
"it is easy to veryify that there is auch a blacklist. ..."
- Sam Sloan (19:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC))
_
"If Sam Sloan is basing his contribution of a blacklist
based on conversations (newsgroup or otherwise),
emails, or his own suspicions that such a blacklist
exists, that is by definition original research and is not
allowed. However, if he were to cite reliable sources
that declare its existence, then its mention may be
included. This is non-negotiable. If Sam Sloan
continues his attempts to include this in the article
against the consensus formed by other editors on this
page, I will reluctantly have to impose a block."
- howcheng (06:37, 3 January 2006 (UTC))
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chess_Life
_
_
"I do object when [Ralf Callenberg], JoanneB
and Janeth, none of whom know anything
about chess, try to delete the entire article."
- Sam Sloan (16:41, 24 December 2005 (UTC))
_
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Dorsch
(The result of the debate was delete. - howcheng
20:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC))
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tom_Dorsch

_
_
"I am having a dispute with Howcheng and
I request the Arbitration Committee to
resolve it." - Sam Sloan
_
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration
Sam Sloan against Howcheng regarding Tom Dorsch
(soundly rejected - Dmcdevit 06:23, 11 February 2006)
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=39178616&oldid=39171201

_
_
"The act by Howcheng to delete my Tom
Dorsch article was clearly wrong. ... I need
an order of protection telling Howcheng
to stay from my articles until he learns
something about chess." - Sam Sloan
(03:03, 4 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
Wikipedia:Deletion review/Tom Dorsch
(deletion endorsed - Splash 23:53, 10 ch 2006)
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ADeletion_review&diff=43217170&oldid=43215421

_
_
"[Paul Rubin] has a history of vandalizing
almost every article I write." - Sam Sloan
(05:52, 19 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
"his request for a 'cease and desist' order
is outside the scope of mediation." - Paul
Rubin (23:45, 19 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation&oldid=44627462#User:Phr_against_User:Sam_Sloan

_
_
"[Ralf Callenberg] is clearly unwilling to
abide by the rules of Wikipedia and
therefore I am asking that if he continues
he be blocked." - Sam Sloan (04:11, 19
ch 2006 (UTC))
_
"This doesn't appear to be a request for
mediation" - Ralf Callenberg (20:24,
19 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_mediation&oldid=44627462#User:Phr_against_User:Sam_Sloan

_
_
"the arbitration committee should consider
this dispute [with Paul Rubin]." - Sam Sloan
(10:15, 20 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration
[Sam Sloan vs. Paul Rubin]
(rejected - Sam Korn 11:11, 25 ch 2006)
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095

_
_
"[Ralf Callenberg] ... should not be allowed
to delete or modify my postings." - Sam
Sloan (01:35, 20 ch 2006 (UTC))
_
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration
[Sam Sloan vs. Ralf Callenberg]
(rejected - Sam Korn 11:11, 25 ch 2006)
_
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=45444953&oldid=45399095

_
_
"I am requesting that, if possible and
legally allowed, your chess federation
bring a proceeding to censure or
reprimand or otherwise punish Herr
Callenberg." - Sam Sloan (Fri,
07 Apr 2006 14:54:46 GMT)



  
Date: 06 Jul 2006 01:59:15
From: Sol
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
"Louis Blair" < > One way to get a view of what Sam Sloan is like is to look
at
> the experience that people have had at Wikipedia:
>

the editors at Wikipedia are a bunch of egomaniacal assholes. They do their
job for free and to exert their influence over others.

Check the listings for Wiki editors and then visit their personal pages.
Every single one of the Wiki editors has dozens of complaints from various
people that they have screwed over arbitrarily. The fact that the Sam Sloan
got on the wrong side of one Wiki asshole (How Cheng) is probably a positive
testament.

Wikipedia is a joke, and garbage. It is facts created by mob rule.




 
Date: 05 Jul 2006 12:48:37
From:
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open

Sol wrote:

> Why are you guys so mean to Sam? Do you know him personally?

Because Sam supports Osama Bin Laden. We are mean to both Sam and
Osama.

What if the fake Sam Sloan is his son, Peter.

cus Roberts



  
Date: 06 Jul 2006 17:00:08
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
On 5 Jul 2006 12:48:37 -0700, [email protected] wrote:

>
>Sol wrote:
>
>> Why are you guys so mean to Sam? Do you know him personally?
>
>Because Sam supports Osama Bin Laden. We are mean to both Sam and
>Osama.
>
>What if the fake Sam Sloan is his son, Peter.
>
>cus Roberts

If you had ever seen anything written by my son Peter, you would know
that he cannot immitate me.

Peter is a very talented artist, however.

Sam Sloan


 
Date: 05 Jul 2006 19:20:09
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
On 5 Jul 2006 15:47:06 GMT [email protected] (Sam Sloan) wrote:

>16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
>
>I just got back from the World Open. In my absence, 16 fake messages
>supposedly from me have been posted especially to the Newsgroup
>rec.games.chess.politics .
>
>I have proof that I did not post these fakes because as everybody at
>the World Open knows, I spent three days from July 2 to July 4 handing
>out my election propaganda. I did not post anything or go online
>during those dates. I handed out 400 flyers. I did not see even one of
>them discarded or thrown in the trash, so is seems that a substantial
>portion of them actually got read.
>
>Of the 16 fake postings during those dates, 14 of them came from
>[email protected] . These are, in general, easy to spot as fakes
>because they say things that I would obviously never say.
>
>However, two fake postings were from From: "Sam Sloan"
>[email protected] and twistycreek.com
>
>These two are matters of concern because in the first place they are
>not short and obscene as postings from [email protected] typically are.
>
>Rather, they are long and detailed and written in a style similar to
>mine. I suspect that the average reader will not realize that they are
>fake.
>
>One of them is entitled Kayo may be Pregnant Again. This is especially
>annoying because although I have long ago given up hope that people
>will stop attacking me, it is beyond the pale to say anything about my
>wife and minor children.
>
>I would never say publicly whether my wife is or is not pregnant
>because there is an old saw that that a pregnancy should never be
>announced until the baby is born, because there might be a miscarriage
>or the baby might not come out alright. Some say it brings bad luck. I
>am not a believer in bad luck but I do follow this rule. I am aware
>that movie stars, in order to gain publicity for themselves, announce
>their pregnancies as do members of the royal families, to maintain
>their dynasties, but normal people do not do that.
>
>My last posting just moments prior to leaving for the World Open was
>entitled "Executive Board motion authorizing the borrowing of
>$561,000"
>
>That was posted at Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 16:37:59 GMT
>
>Any postings by Sam Sloan between that date and this posting here was
>fake.
>
>Sam Sloan

The above post is a forgery, and while I hate to have to admit it, it is a
convincing one. There are only six people who are capable of such a good
job and two of them are dead, one is in an asylum but is not called Raymond
Weinstein, one lives in a village near Geneva and one in central
California, which is almost the same thing. Which leaves Eade, and one
other.

What is irritating is that this forger clearly knows a lot about me,
including my whereabouts at various times. He probably has one of my flyers
too. This stalker may be the same person who claimed I was dead two years
ago when in fact I was at the World Open and was not participating
(somebody saw me there and put the group right, and it wasn't Leko).

This time he uses my presence at the Open to try to prove that I am not
posting, in order to discredit my authentication with the twistycreek
service. I thought everyone knew that there now is internet access at
nickel and dime rates at the Open. What is available almost right across
the street probably includes free net access while the baths are heating up
or the girls are having a checkup.

Where the forger slips up is in his mock indignation about Kayo and the
pregnancy, which of course was news to him until he read my posting. I have
never hidden information about my wives and children and have posted nude
or other pictures of them on my website for many years. So why would I all
of a sudden find it:
>beyond the pale to say anything about my wife and minor children.
I preannounced Sandra's arrival. So why should I find preannouncing her
sibling distasteful? My websites and postings have been full of news about
them. Including guestbooks of people laughing at Kayo's pidgin English,
which is much better now, and how she looked back then.

I don't use words like "beyond the pale" either, not in that way. People
beyond the pale are probably Scandinavian or at least play the opening.

Where the forger slipped up worse is that he is somehow giving the
appearance of using my email @ishipress.com and my ISP verio, which means
the DMCA can be used and he will eventually be tracked down by law
enforcement when they are bothered. If I was not sure about this I wouldn't
give him hints as I do about how to be a better forger.

All this said, he did a competent job above, and probably therefore never
worked for the USCF and can't be Bill Brock. I will set up a webpage about
this matter. I wonder if he knows about Nuristan or the ways of the
Chitrali? I have webpages to help, a book on speaking Khowar and one on the
way on Pashtu.

If you can't tell the real me from the forgers (not the @usa.com and gmail
ones, they are obvious), please look at the message detail. If it doesn't
have twistycreek in the i.d., it isn't from me. I wonder if he can forge
these too, in which case I will have to think of something else until he is
rounded up, and get a refund from twistycreek. Since it is unlikely there
is more than one persistent forger, I can assume that the forger @usa.com
is the same person as the DMCA-forger @ishipress.com, just writing in
different ways.

If anyone can help me on this, I would be appreciative. I did wonder how
long it would be before Hanke slunk back in. As a reliable source I must
keep anonymous wrote, what he does not know could hurt you.

Now I must satisfy Kayo's needs. While with Sandra her needs were for
pizzas with strange toppings. This time it is better.

Sam Sloan



  
Date: 06 Jul 2006 17:28:14
From: Sam Sloan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
I must admit that what follows below is a great forgery, a work of
art. If I did not know that I did not write it, I would probably have
thought that I did write it.

I happen to agree that there are very few people who are capable of
creating such a detailed forgery. Most forgeries by [email protected]
are one paragraph long and contain a few obscenities, so anybody can
realize that this is a forgery even without realizing or being warned
of possibly forgeries.

I thonk that the forger below wants to be caught, so that he can
obtain recognition for his work. The first names that come to mind are
Jim Eade and Tim Hanke. Both of them are good writers and are fully
capable of this forgery. Few other regular posters to this group are
capable of this.

Here is one paragraph that may provide us with clues as to who this
forger is. Perhaps the forger is following the book and movie, "The
DaVinci Code".

The forger writes:

" >The above post is a forgery, and while I hate to have to admit it,
it is a convincing one. There are only six people who are capable of
such a good job and two of them are dead, one is in an asylum but is
not called Raymond Weinstein, one lives in a village near Geneva and
one in central California, which is almost the same thing. Which
leaves Eade, and one other."

So, who who are the six people?

The one who lives in a village near Geneva is clearly Edward Winter.
The one in central California might be Tom Dorsch, although I believe
that he no longer lives there. I do not know who the two who are dead
people are or who the one in an asylum is. Any suggestions? The "one
other" is probably Tim Hanke, because of what was written in the last
paragraph, which says:

" >If anyone can help me on this, I would be appreciative. I
did wonder how long it would be before Hanke slunk back in. As a
reliable source I must keep anonymous wrote, what he does not know
could hurt you."

So, he is implying that Hanke is the forger. Of course, he is saying
that what I, the Real Sam Sloan, wrote, is a forgery, but anybody who
carefully studies the posting below will realize that it is a forgery.
Whomever did this, devoted a lot of time to it and therefore I believe
that it is the same person who wrote the "SlamStoan" spoofs some years
ago.

The Real Sam Sloan


On 5 Jul 2006 19:20:09 -0000, Sam Sloan <[email protected] > wrote:

>The above post is a forgery, and while I hate to have to admit it, it is a
>convincing one. There are only six people who are capable of such a good
>job and two of them are dead, one is in an asylum but is not called Raymond
>Weinstein, one lives in a village near Geneva and one in central
>California, which is almost the same thing. Which leaves Eade, and one
>other.
>
>What is irritating is that this forger clearly knows a lot about me,
>including my whereabouts at various times. He probably has one of my flyers
>too. This stalker may be the same person who claimed I was dead two years
>ago when in fact I was at the World Open and was not participating
>(somebody saw me there and put the group right, and it wasn't Leko).
>
>This time he uses my presence at the Open to try to prove that I am not
>posting, in order to discredit my authentication with the twistycreek
>service. I thought everyone knew that there now is internet access at
>nickel and dime rates at the Open. What is available almost right across
>the street probably includes free net access while the baths are heating up
>or the girls are having a checkup.
>
>Where the forger slips up is in his mock indignation about Kayo and the
>pregnancy, which of course was news to him until he read my posting. I have
>never hidden information about my wives and children and have posted nude
>or other pictures of them on my website for many years. So why would I all
>of a sudden find it:
>>beyond the pale to say anything about my wife and minor children.
>I preannounced Sandra's arrival. So why should I find preannouncing her
>sibling distasteful? My websites and postings have been full of news about
>them. Including guestbooks of people laughing at Kayo's pidgin English,
>which is much better now, and how she looked back then.
>
>I don't use words like "beyond the pale" either, not in that way. People
>beyond the pale are probably Scandinavian or at least play the opening.
>
>Where the forger slipped up worse is that he is somehow giving the
>appearance of using my email @ishipress.com and my ISP verio, which means
>the DMCA can be used and he will eventually be tracked down by law
>enforcement when they are bothered. If I was not sure about this I wouldn't
>give him hints as I do about how to be a better forger.
>
>All this said, he did a competent job above, and probably therefore never
>worked for the USCF and can't be Bill Brock. I will set up a webpage about
>this matter. I wonder if he knows about Nuristan or the ways of the
>Chitrali? I have webpages to help, a book on speaking Khowar and one on the
>way on Pashtu.
>
>If you can't tell the real me from the forgers (not the @usa.com and gmail
>ones, they are obvious), please look at the message detail. If it doesn't
>have twistycreek in the i.d., it isn't from me. I wonder if he can forge
>these too, in which case I will have to think of something else until he is
>rounded up, and get a refund from twistycreek. Since it is unlikely there
>is more than one persistent forger, I can assume that the forger @usa.com
>is the same person as the DMCA-forger @ishipress.com, just writing in
>different ways.
>
>If anyone can help me on this, I would be appreciative. I did wonder how
>long it would be before Hanke slunk back in. As a reliable source I must
>keep anonymous wrote, what he does not know could hurt you.
>
>Now I must satisfy Kayo's needs. While with Sandra her needs were for
>pizzas with strange toppings. This time it is better.
>
>Sam Sloan



   
Date: 06 Jul 2006 14:43:32
From: Barnabas Collins
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:28:14 GMT, [email protected] (Sam Sloan)
wrote:

>I must admit that what follows below is a great forgery, a work of
>art. If I did not know that I did not write it, I would probably have
>thought that I did write it.
There is one lesson i've learned from this entire issue. Never ever
conisder joining USCF. Sounds like a questionable organization.

I've have no idea who is right in this issue, but one thing is
crystal clear: I don't really care. Rather than bother with
this organization, i'll stick with my current chess games and concrate
on those.

The organization sounds worse than useless.

Besides considering how bad I am at chess i'm probably not worthy
of a chess group.

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


    
Date: 08 Jul 2006 07:31:14
From: matthew
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Can we wrap up this latest edition of "To tell the truth" right away?
OK. Kitty Carlisle wants to know what color socks you were wearing on
the 5th day of the World Open, business man's schedule, in 1999.
The guy with the same cheesy look as the short-order cook that didn't
get tipped wants to know when you last checked the oil in your cab.
Jerry Hankin would like to know how you spell perestroika. And,
finally, the maitre d' at the Adam's k needs to know how many
shiilings in a pound. Good luck contestants.

Now, ladies and gentlemen, will the real Sam Sloan please stand up!





On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 14:43:32 -0400, Barnabas Collins
<[email protected] > wrote:

>On Thu, 06 Jul 2006 17:28:14 GMT, [email protected] (Sam Sloan)
>wrote:
>
>>I must admit that what follows below is a great forgery, a work of
>>art. If I did not know that I did not write it, I would probably have
>>thought that I did write it.
>There is one lesson i've learned from this entire issue. Never ever
>conisder joining USCF. Sounds like a questionable organization.
>
>I've have no idea who is right in this issue, but one thing is
>crystal clear: I don't really care. Rather than bother with
>this organization, i'll stick with my current chess games and concrate
>on those.
>
>The organization sounds worse than useless.
>
>Besides considering how bad I am at chess i'm probably not worthy
>of a chess group.
>
>----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
>http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
>----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


   
Date: 06 Jul 2006 18:00:53
From: Mike Nolan
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
[email protected] (Sam Sloan) writes:

>I happen to agree that there are very few people who are capable of
>creating such a detailed forgery.

There are tens of thousands of geeks with the technical skills to forge
USENET posts and still dozens of open USENET portals, even though USENET
is slowly dying. (I'm told the Univerity of Indiana is shutting down
their USENET news site this summer.) It wouldn't surprise me if the
hacker nets have a forger's toolkit to do it with.

The annual Faulkner and Hemingway write-alike contests draw thousands
of entrants, I suspect it takes far more skill to emulate those writers.
The Bulwer-Lytton contest also draws quite a few entrants, proving that
anyone can write spectacularly bad, though Bulwer-Lytton's works aren't
nearly as bad as his reputation suggests.

The better question is why anyone would bother.
--
Mike Nolan


 
Date: 05 Jul 2006 11:26:17
From: Matt Nemmers
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
Sam Sloan wrote:
> 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
>
> I just got back from the World Open. In my absence, 16 fake messages
> supposedly from me have been posted especially to the Newsgroup
> rec.games.chess.politics .
>
> I have proof that I did not post these fakes because as everybody at
> the World Open knows, I spent three days from July 2 to July 4 handing
> out my election propaganda. I did not post anything or go online
> during those dates. I handed out 400 flyers. I did not see even one of
> them discarded or thrown in the trash, so is seems that a substantial
> portion of them actually got read.
>
> Of the 16 fake postings during those dates, 14 of them came from
> [email protected] . These are, in general, easy to spot as fakes
> because they say things that I would obviously never say.
>
> However, two fake postings were from From: "Sam Sloan"
> [email protected] and twistycreek.com
>
> These two are matters of concern because in the first place they are
> not short and obscene as postings from [email protected] typically are.
>
> Rather, they are long and detailed and written in a style similar to
> mine. I suspect that the average reader will not realize that they are
> fake.
>
> One of them is entitled Kayo may be Pregnant Again. This is especially
> annoying because although I have long ago given up hope that people
> will stop attacking me, it is beyond the pale to say anything about my
> wife and minor children.
>
> I would never say publicly whether my wife is or is not pregnant
> because there is an old saw that that a pregnancy should never be
> announced until the baby is born, because there might be a miscarriage
> or the baby might not come out alright. Some say it brings bad luck. I
> am not a believer in bad luck but I do follow this rule. I am aware
> that movie stars, in order to gain publicity for themselves, announce
> their pregnancies as do members of the royal families, to maintain
> their dynasties, but normal people do not do that.
>
> My last posting just moments prior to leaving for the World Open was
> entitled "Executive Board motion authorizing the borrowing of
> $561,000"
>
> That was posted at Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 16:37:59 GMT
>
> Any postings by Sam Sloan between that date and this posting here was
> fake.
>
> Sam Sloan

SOLUTION: Stop posting on Usenet. This will eventually stop the
forgers and will let everyone breathe a sigh of relief that you're
finally gone for good.



  
Date: 05 Jul 2006 19:22:45
From: Sol
Subject: Re: 16 Fake Sam Sloan messages posted while I was at the World Open
X-No-archive: yes

"Matt Nemmers" < > SOLUTION: Stop posting on Usenet. This will eventually
stop the forgers and will let everyone breathe a sigh of relief that you're
finally gone for good. >

Why are you guys so mean to Sam? Do you know him personally? He seems like a
reasonable person. I feel very sad that you folks cannot all try to work
together to improve the USCF (and lower membership dues, contest fees, etc.)