| |
Main
Date: 01 Oct 2007 14:58:38
From: B. Lafferty
Subject: Prior Censorship--USCF Forums
|
The USCF forums have now sunk to the level of the Polgar Blog. Selected
poster, moi being one, must now have posts reviewed before being posted.
So, here's what upset them so:
by Brian Lafferty on Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:43 am #71978
1. Make vicious anonymous attack on other candidate.
2. Attack a critics with defamatory communications behind their back.
3. Attack critics by impersonating them.
Can you guess who they are? When will the EB take action against them? Will
this have to be resolved by going to the courts and the national press
(note: not just the NY Times)? When? When?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Hal Terrie on Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:12 am #71979
Thanks ever so much for this post, which should be quite sufficient to have
the Moderators place you in the "review before posting" queue, followed we
can only hope, by a high level sanction which should end your posting here
for a considerable period.
-- Hal Terrie
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by ueschessmom on Mon Oct 01, 2007 6:45 am #71980
Hal Terrie has a point about putting Brian Lafferty in the "review before
posting" queue. Without commenting on the merits of this whole controversy
(or tempest in a teapot depending on your outlook), this is the second day
in a row where Mr. Lafferty has posted something early in the morning (when
the volunteer moderators are presumably sleeping) that either violates the
AUGs or a specific request by the ED to cease posting on this topic or both.
It seems like he is taking advantage of the fact that this forum does not
have round-the-clock moderation. By the time the moderators wake up,
discover his post and remove it, the damage that Mr. Lafferty hoped for is
done.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by mnibb on Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:19 am #71982
I am actually surprised Mr. Lafferty is not in the "review" que. I would
have thougtht based on the removal of yesterday's posts, he would have been
placed in this que.
Perhaps the moderator has reviewed the post and has determined it is not
related to the request/instructions that Mr. Hall has directed.
12818435
k Nibbelin
Fellow Life Management Institute
Chartered Life Underwriter
Scholastic Chess Organizer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Brian Lafferty on Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:20 am #71983
Hal Terrie wrote:Thanks ever so much for this post, which should be quite
sufficient to have the Moderators place you in the "review before posting"
queue, followed we can only hope, by a high level sanction which should end
your posting here for a considerable period.
-- Hal Terrie
Well, Hal old boy, this forum as a place to discuss issues openly and
reasonably is gone. Putting people in a review Que simply reduces this forum
to the level of the Polgar blog--the mouthpiece of the EB and its
supporters. The moderators and the EB have killed it.
But, discussion is going to survive elsewhere and the front is going to
change from internal to external very soon. BTW, that's not a threat. That's
the reality of what is about to happen on more than one front. If the USCF
can't or won't change it ways, the game simply goes to the next level.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
by Brian Lafferty on Mon Oct 01, 2007 7:29 am #71985
ueschessmom wrote:Hal Terrie has a point about putting Brian Lafferty in
the "review before posting" queue. Without commenting on the merits of this
whole controversy (or tempest in a teapot depending on your outlook), this
is the second day in a row where Mr. Lafferty has posted something early in
the morning (when the volunteer moderators are presumably sleeping) that
either violates the AUGs or a specific request by the ED to cease posting on
this topic or both. It seems like he is taking advantage of the fact that
this forum does not have round-the-clock moderation. By the time the
moderators wake up, discover his post and remove it, the damage that Mr.
Lafferty hoped for is done.
Actually Mommy, I have begun my internet day early for years. The dogs get
fed at 5am and then I go on line. It has nothing to do with when the
moderators wake up. I couldn't care less about them.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
a.. Reply with quote
b.. Report this post
by ueschessmom on Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:04 am #71991
Whether he is doing it intentionally or not (and you don't have to take his
word for it, anymore than you have to agree with him that his initial post
on this thread did not contain a lightly veiled threat), it is the second
day in a row ( at the very least) that he has submitted a post that arguably
violates the AUGs and an ED directive at 5 am. So put him on the review list
and if, after rewiew, you think it doesn't violate anything, post it.
I can't wait to see which other national media outlet is going to bite at
this story. Let's see. If I had space to run a chess story this week, what
would it be -- Former World Chess Champion Garry Kasparov entering the race
for the Russian presidency, New World Champion Vishy Anand or
infighting/backstabbing among a handful of USCF members and rgcp denizens?
Dylan Loeb McLain already made the mistake once (at least in my view) of
getting involved in a similar dispute among chess egos. I think he lost a
lot of credibility (at least among chess folk here in NYC) the last time.
begin 666 icon_post_target.gif
M1TE&.#EA"P`)`+,-`'=W=_____GY^<;&QO[^_N[N[N3DY//S\_W]_?3T]/7U
M]<?'Q^/CXP```````````"'^.CQ#3U!9/D-O<'ER:6=H=" R,# T(%1H92!P
M:'!"0B!'<F]U<"P@06QL(%)I9VAT<R!297-E<G9E9"X`(?D$`0``#0`L````
M``L`"0``!"FP-4"IO#-HBX$654<0"$(`G: *#'H!2G(<ABL!2:$/]F0,@P6O
&4PDU(@`[
`
end
|
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2007 22:43:24
From: EZoto
Subject: Re: Prior Censorship--USCF Forums
|
Wow. It sure didn't take long before the trash started popping up on
Zsuza and Paul. And they haven't even started plans on what they want
to do.
EZoto
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2007 01:34:18
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Prior Censorship--USCF Forums
|
On Oct 2, 1:03 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
>
> >Since I have not seen it stated explicitly before, I
> call on Paul Truong to resign. This is one of those perfect
> cases of hypocrisy. Truong's ticket campaigned on (among
> other issues) the need for a more civil discussion of chess
> politics, and as leaders who would be shining examples in
> the community. Truong is not denying the truth of the accusations
> (which seems hard to do), but arguing technicalities. His behavior
> was extraordinarily uncivil and embarrassing. If Truong feels that
> there
> is a right to anonymity, he is free to make this protest and then
> resign.
> I have yet to see even any apology for his actions. I hope that his
> allies
> convince him quietly to step down; there is no way that this issue
> can
> be spun so that he will not be seen as a divisive and petty board
> member.>
> -- Jeremy Spinrad
Mr. Sloan wrote a very long and convincing piece which
attempted to nail the coffin shut on Paul Truong, but as far
as I can see he left one conspicuous breathing hole: he
continually referred to PT /and/ Susan Polgar as potential
fakes, not only PT.
Why all of a sudden SP is granted an exemption is not
quite clear; at least, not to me. Is she better looking?
Has she no fingers with which to type? What then? It
was chief prosecutor Sloan who himself indicated that
the evidence was geographical in nature, and that where
one went, the other followed.
> Months ago, I wrote that the USCF oligarchs
> would allow a relatively brief period of semi-free
> discussion at the USCF Forum with the idea of luring
> writers from rec.games.chess.politics. Later, they
> would institute censorship.
Mr. Mitchell and IM Innes have been complaining for
quite some time about this "censorship", so where the
period of semi-free discussion comes about is not clear.
Perhaps it sneaked in before the idea of censorship was
even raised?
> Of course, I was correct. It had to happen.
Larry Parr believes that, "of course", LP is correct;
velous.
> You now have Hal Terrie, as a prime example,
> showing us the quality of mind that has made him a
> long-time stalwart of the USCF Anti-Ethics Committee,
> an infamous group. If he is not Sgt. Drewitz from
> Good Morning, Vietnam, then no one is!
Never saw it, but I recall that the star was advertised
to be Robin Williams (who was not bad in One Hour
Photo).
> Brian Lafferty has written nothing to deserve
> "moderation." In truth, the man has been too moderate
> all along. Mr. Terrie's tone is that of a malignant
> toadie shouting, "Gotcha!" He would have thrived as
> a censor in Eastern Europe.
>
> Having said all of the above, I am not among
> those howling for Paul Truong's blood. I have yet to
> read anything that links him to writing defamatory
> copy.
Wow. I always suspected that someone out there
might be more out-of-the-loop than I was, but until
now I was not completely sure. Sam Sloan is the
de facto prosecuting attorney in this forum, so that
claim looks very queer indeed.
> Someone has to put his fingers on the keyboard
> before it is fair to call for his resignation.
What I said! It is not enough that someone merely
/looks/ guilty; you need substantive evidence which
eliminates possibilities like being framed, or being in
the wrong place at the wrong time -- that sort of thing.
> There is so much dirt within USCF governance
> and, yes, so much cynicism. The insiders -- and
> during my years as Chess Life editor, I heard the
> staff --laugh at the regular members and consciously attempt
> to mislead them.
Yes, yes; we already know about that from reading
Chess Life. The letters to the editor section is a
testament that not everyone is so easily fooled,
however.
> I will never forget being summoned to poolside
> at the 1985 US Open in Hollywood Florida. This was
> the year in which Florencio Campomanes, the now
> convicted felon (embezzlement and, one guesses, a nice
> dollop of extortion)
As I said, out of the loop; certainly it should be
possible to know exactly which crimes someone is
convicted of, after the fact. No need for guesswork,
then.
> who remains FIDE honorary
> president, stopped the first world title match between
> Kasparov and Karpov.
Another in a long series of fiascoes for FIDE. Why
can't they be st, and figure out who is the best
player in the world and then fix it so he/she has a
good chance of winning a cycle *convincingly*?
There are plenty of corporations which would like
to be associated with chess and world champions
(if we could just keep the riff-raff at bay).
> A CNN open mike caught
> Campomanes whispering to Karpov at the press
> conference, "I told them exactly what you told me to
> tell them."
That's it? No response from GM Karpov? How very
odd.
(Rest of rant snipped.)
I think Mr. Parr has lost the thread, gotten caught up in
his same old, same old ad hominem stuff. He picked a
title indicating that "prior censorship" was the subject of
discussion, so let's look at that. I noted that the honcho
at the USCF gave legal liability as the justification for
commanding everyone to keep mum on the USCF forum;
is this normal? Do other non-profit organizations need to
silence discussion in this manner, or is this an anomaly?
At any rate, it is only the USCF forum which is affected,
not us. And they are only stopped from their ceaseless
infighting on one subject, not any others. Small potatoes.
If they want, they can all come here and sling insults
back and forth or accuse Paul Truong of fixing it so I lose
at GetClub to an illegal move. Yes, it must have been
him... .
-- help bot
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2007 23:03:46
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Prior Censorship--USCF Forums
|
JEREMY SPINRAD CALLS FOR TRUONG TO RESIGN
>Since I have not seen it stated explicitly before, I
call on Paul Truong to resign. This is one of those perfect
cases of hypocrisy. Truong's ticket campaigned on (among
other issues) the need for a more civil discussion of chess
politics, and as leaders who would be shining examples in
the community. Truong is not denying the truth of the accusations
(which seems hard to do), but arguing technicalities. His behavior
was extraordinarily uncivil and embarrassing. If Truong feels that
there
is a right to anonymity, he is free to make this protest and then
resign.
I have yet to see even any apology for his actions. I hope that his
allies
convince him quietly to step down; there is no way that this issue
can
be spun so that he will not be seen as a divisive and petty board
member. >
-- Jeremy Spinrad
Months ago, I wrote that the USCF oligarchs
would allow a relatively brief period of semi-free
discussion at the USCF Forum with the idea of luring
writers from rec.games.chess.politics. Later, they
would institute censorship.
Of course, I was correct. It had to happen.
You now have Hal Terrie, as a prime example,
showing us the quality of mind that has made him a
long-time stalwart of the USCF Anti-Ethics Committee,
an infamous group. If he is not Sgt. Drewitz from
Good Morning, Vietnam, then no one is!
Brian Lafferty has written nothing to deserve
"moderation." In truth, the man has been too moderate
all along. Mr. Terrie's tone is that of a malignant
toadie shouting, "Gotcha!" He would have thrived as
a censor in Eastern Europe.
Having said all of the above, I am not among
those howling for Paul Truong's blood. I have yet to
read anything that links him to writing defamatory
copy. Someone has to put his fingers on the keyboard
before it is fair to call for his resignation.
There is so much dirt within USCF governance
and, yes, so much cynicism. The insiders -- and
during my years as Chess Life editor, I heard the
staff --laugh at the regular members and consciously attempt
to mislead them.
I will never forget being summoned to poolside
at the 1985 US Open in Hollywood Florida. This was
the year in which Florencio Campomanes, the now
convicted felon (embezzlement and, one guesses, a nice
dollop of extortion) who remains FIDE honorary
president, stopped the first world title match between
Kasparov and Karpov. A CNN open mike caught
Campomanes whispering to Karpov at the press
conference, "I told them exactly what you told me to
tell them."
And so it was.
Then USCF President E. Steven Doyle delivered a
speech before angry players at that year's Amateur
Team East saying how outraged we all were by the
cancellation and that something would be done about it.
I adopted an editorial line reflecting the
pledged word of the publisher.
Hence my morning at poolside with E. Steven
Doyle. He informed me in no uncertain terms that he
had lied to the players at the Amateur Team East. Our
real Federation policy was to support Campo who
himself had come to the US Open to demand that Chess
Life stop publishing -- well -- material such as the
excerpts from the CNN open mike.
The tragedy of our support, first, for the
criminal Campomanes and now for the killer Ilyumzhinov
has resulted in a decade or so of steady decline on
the world chess scene. The world championship is now
a pale reflection of what it once was, and our policy
is to support the man who wanted so much to drag down
the status of the world titleholder.
FIDE politicians hated a strong world champion
such as Kasparov, who became an alternative pole on
the world chess magnet. Fischer was not a powerful
champion because he dropped out, but his sheer
celebrity and strength put the world title in turmoil
for over a decade.
Ilyumzhinov devised a long-term scheme to reduce
the status of the world champion. His first attempt
was enormous tournaments that were chess lotteries of
two- and three-game matches. These events lacked
legitimacy, and they were largely ignored even within
the chess world. They helped to destroy the position
of chess in the mainstream media.
We now have a short world title tournament that
has reduced the crown to something won over a space of
14 games. FIDE's idea is to have a revolving
titleholder -- a champion du jour.
The problem with this political maneuver is that
the world wants heroes and great players who stand
out. The traditional world championship was a premier
event that once received wide coverage in the world
press. No longer.
The role of Bill Kelleher, as Kirsan Ilyumzhinov's
man in America, has been to smoothe the way for this
destruction. He and our other FIDE representatives
over the years have sold out chess for either Kirsan's
expensive trinkets or for political preferment.
How refreshing were the new Board finally to
cease de facto support of drug testing and push for
radical reform in the world of chess.
Don't hold your breath.
Yours, Larry Parr
[email protected] wrote:
> > by ueschessmom on Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:04 am #71991
> > ...
> > infighting/backstabbing among a handful of USCF members and rgcp denizens?
> > ...
>
> The significance of this discovery far surpasses the petty scope of
> forum moderation.
>
> Paul Truong committed fraud to order gain control of a multi-million
> dollar chess budget.
>
> That's a FACT.
>
> And it's a criminal act.
|
| |
Date: 01 Oct 2007 08:47:13
From:
Subject: Re: Prior Censorship--USCF Forums
|
> by ueschessmom on Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:04 am #71991
> ...
> infighting/backstabbing among a handful of USCF members and rgcp denizens?
> ...
The significance of this discovery far surpasses the petty scope of
forum moderation.
Paul Truong committed fraud to order gain control of a multi-million
dollar chess budget.
That's a FACT.
And it's a criminal act.
|
|
