Legal threats from Polgar and Truong
Tim Hanke
* * *
Law Offices of Anthony J. Pirrotti, P.C.
Dear Mr. Hanke:
Please be advised that I have been retained by Ms. Susan Polgar and Mr. Paul
Truong in reference to certain libelous statements which you have made on
e-mails and over the Internet regarding their character.
The statements made by you constitute libel per se and I beg to advise you
that unless you cease and desist your conduct, directly or indirectly, my
clients have advised that they will commence a lawsuit against you for
damages and for an injunction to restrain your unlawful conduct.
Yours faithfully,
Anthony J. Pirrotti
cc: Board of Directors of the United States Chess Federation
Zsuzsanna Polgar
Paul Truong
* * *
Tim Hanke
Tom Klem
LOL
Tom Klem
"Tim Hanke" <timoth...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:JNnIb.79540$VB2.161693@attbi_s51...
Sam Sloan
I think that they have a very strong case. Among other things, Hanke
claimed that Zsuzsa did not play her own games but essentially cheated
by having Truong play for her using a computer.
Such an allegation is clearly libelous.
Sam Sloan
Bruce Draney
Women's team?
You know, I don't recollect Tim ever saying ANYTHING on RGCP about
Polgar, but I remember Sam Sloan posting one of his "exclusives" about
it. Maybe they could sue Sam Sloan for saying something that Hanke had
allegedly said or done, but I doubt it. Now I do think that Booz has
criticized both of them, but I don't remember Hanke saying much of
anything.
Best Regards,
Bruce
Neil Brennen
"Bruce Draney" <bdr...@novia.net> wrote in message
news:3FF265...@novia.net...
I don't recall Hanke posting anything either. I do remember Sloan posting
some trash or other. It's strange that the letter Hanke received does not
specify the alleged libelous remarks. As it is, how is Hanke to know what
Truong objects to?
The whole thing strikes me as more political than legal; Truong wants to
silence a critic, and so he rattles a sabre. Shades of Don Schultz suing
Larry Evans...
Bob Bennett
The Law
Defamation Generally
The reason for having defamation laws as a civil remedy in tort is
because 'A person has the right to his good name'. Defenses are
nevertheless available for balancing the interest of freedom of
speech, such as the defense of fair comment and justification.
What is defamatory?
A statement is defamatory if it tends to lower the plaintiff in the
estimation of right thinking members of society generally.
Alternatively speaking, the matter tends to make the plaintiff shunned
or avoided by right-thinking members of society. The meaning of the
defamatory nature of the statement can be literal or by inference
Libel and Slander distinguished
A distinction has to be drawn between libel and slander. Libel: are
publications in permanent form while slander are publications by
spoken word or other transient means. Unlike slander, damage is
presumed in libel actionable without proof of special damage.
Meaning of 'Permanent form"
Permanent form can be something in writing or in other permanent form.
Examples are electronic communications via e-mail, newsgroups, message
board, homepages are matters of permanent form. Broadcast by radio,
TV, Internet, public performance, film soundtrack, CD, tape-recording
also meet the requirement of 'permanent form'.
Requirement of Publication
The statement must be published by communicating to at least one
person other than the person defamed.
Examples on the Internet are:
Usenet posting / e-mail to a third party, such as by cc. copy /
message board / chat room /world wide web /
Defenses
Fair comment / justification / absolute privilege / qualified
privilege / apology and payment into court / unintentional defamation
/ innocent dissemination /
_
"By the same token, IBM's alleged involvement is probably a
complete fantasy, like the 1,000 letters a month Truong
claims that Susan Polgar gets for her openings column in
Chess Life." - Timothy Hanke (29 Dec 2003 18:11:06 PST)
Bob Bennett
John Swartz
Polgar/Truong has a legit case against Tim Hanke, then I suspect that
many other posters here on this forum might also have legit cases
against other posters here.
To me, this sounds more like someone hopes that the threat of a lawsuit
will encourage someone to cease and desist activity that they dislike.
But I will be interested to see what becomes of this.
John
John Lamont
Susan for cheating or really anything else, though he did criticize
her choice as GM of the year. I happen to agree with him on that, but
nevermind. On the other hand even if he did say she cheated using
PTruong and a computer online (which I don't see why she would
bother), there's no way a libel suit would succeed as he can simply
state it is his opinion that it is so, and Ms. Polgar would have to
prove definitively that she did not cheat to succeed in a lawsuit, and
that would be hard to do.
Bruce Draney
> Defenses
> Fair comment / justification / absolute privilege / qualified
> privilege / apology and payment into court / unintentional defamation
> / innocent dissemination /
>
> _
> "By the same token, IBM's alleged involvement is probably a
> complete fantasy, like the 1,000 letters a month Truong
> claims that Susan Polgar gets for her openings column in
> Chess Life." - Timothy Hanke (29 Dec 2003 18:11:06 PST)
>
> Bob Bennett
If this is the best they've got they'll be laughed out of court in my
opinion. Truong did actually say she got 1,000 letters a month about
her column in a usenet post, and Tim was questioning the veracity of
this statement. I don't see libel as an issue, but then again I'm not
involved.
She would have to demonstrate that something was false, malicious and
that it did damage to her reputation.
Best Regards,
Bruce
The Masked Bishop
threatened lawsuit. Best response to this is "see you in court, assholes."
TMB (who remains anonymous for several reasons, this bullshit being one of
them).
"Tim Hanke" <timoth...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:JNnIb.79540$VB2.161693@attbi_s51...
Sam Sloan
Tim Hanke did not say that in a posting to this newsgroup, but he did
say that in a letter to a list which included the Executive Board, the
Executive Director and numerous chess politicos.
I disagree with your legal conclusion. If Hanke said that for example
that Sam Sloan cheated by using a computer in an Internet Chess Game,
it is very doubtful that I would have much grounds for suit. However,
Hanke said that a distinguished grandmaster and former World Champion
Susan Polgar cheated in a chess game. I feel that she will prevail in
the lawsuit, unless Hanke has some evidence to support his claim.
Sam Sloan
The Masked Bishop
That is an assessment well open to dispute.
TMB
"Sam Sloan" <sl...@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:3ff2fe2b...@ca.news.verio.net...
The Masked Bishop
highly-censorial cultures, and they probably both lack a fundamental
understanding of just what "freedom of the press" means. Certainly they can
find a lawyer who will bill them for writing a boiler-plate letter, but
methinks they need to go read the Constitution before they pursue this one
any farther. Welcome to America....
--TMB
Bruce Draney
Ah, but the question is whether the evidence was enough to suggest that
Hanke wasn't just making up such a charge. My recollection was that the
charge was originally made by administrators of the internet site where
the game took place. Hanke (and others) apparently felt the evidence
compelling enough to make the charge. The risks for the plaintiffs in
pursuing the matter is considerable. Suppose the evidence is there? It
could actually do far more damage to their reputations than just moving
on. Didn't Fernandez also say that something was fishy about the
matter?
I still think it's mostly bluster and threat by the plaintiffs.
Usually such tactics carry a significant risk and they almost never go
to court. If they do go to court, they almost never succeed.
Would you like to make a friendly wager on the likelihood that this
will ever see the light of day of a court date?
Best Regards,
Bruce
The Masked Bishop
was no mention of taking action against past ones. It's pretty obvious there
is no case here, that the "plaintiffs" know it, and that Polgar and Truong
are using a time-honored intimidation tactic to soothe their evidently
fragile egos.
This will do nothing but harm their own reputations in the chess world. I
didn't know Paul Truong from a hole in the ground, but my respect for Ms.
Polgar, currently Chess Life's only GM columnist, has dropped to zero. Just
another reason to:
NOT RENEW. TAKE A YEAR OFF FROM THE USCF.
TMB
"Bruce Draney" <bdr...@novia.net> wrote in message
news:3FF301...@novia.net...
Tim Hanke
Tim Hanke
"Bob Bennett" <robert...@japan.com> wrote in message
news:75d5c919.03123...@posting.google.com...
John Fernandez
Both Mr. Truong and I have nicely asked Mr. Hanke and Mr. Booz numerous times
to stop giving false information about us. They repeatedly refused. They have
made numerous outrageous damaging unsubstantiated charges toward both of us via
e-mail and over the Internet. These two men have official positions as VP of
Finance and Chairman of the Finance Committee. They represent the USCF and
they have serious responsibilities especially during this difficult time for
the federation. People may misconstrue their fabricated remarks as facts.
Therefore, there should be no room for fictitious information and innuendoes.
It is very damaging to me personally and I simply cannot allow it to continue
indefinitely. Enough is enough! They are responsible for their actions and
they will be held accountable for what they say and do.
They do not have to like either of us personally. They do not have to approve
what we are doing to help US Chess. They can agree to disagree. But it is
unacceptable to manufacture information to purposely damage anyone. I have a
full schedule in 2004. I am very busy taking care of my children, training for
the Olympiad, helping my team mates, running a chess center, doing events to
promote chess and much more. I do not have extra time to worry about a legal
case against either of these men. However, if they choose to continue their
outlandish behaviors, my business manager and I are prepared to defend
ourselves vigorously. I regret that it has to come this far. I have nothing
against these men personally and I do not know them well at all.
Unfortunately, they left me with no other choice but to guard myself. I hope
that they will make the right decision and not escalate this further.
Happy New Year to all! Best wishes for a healthy and happy 2004!
Best wishes,
GM Susan Polgar
Jerome Bibuld
Heil Dubya!
What is YOUR definition of a "distinguished grandmaster"?
For starters, off the top of my head, GM Polgar has won the World Championship;
she was the first female grandmaster (IGM, NOT WGM); she has a column in CHESS
LIFE that has won an award from the Chess Journalists of America; as a teen
ager, in her first try, she led her country to a gold medal in the (1988)
Olympiad; she has been the highest rated woman in the world and among the top
five for more than a decade. To me, that seems enough to earn the descriptor
(in spades).
>
>>distinguished grandmaster"
>
>That is an assessment well open to dispute.
>
>TMB
Heute Uhmuhrikkka, Afghanistan und Irak. Morgen die ganze Welt!
Uhmuhrikkka, Uhmuhrikkka über Alles!
(Was 11 September 2001 Kristallnacht or the date of the Reichstag fire?)
Fraternally,
Jerome Bibuld
(I go on trial at 77 Lexington Avenue, White Plains, NY, at 1400 hours, 5
January, for refusing to move away from a demonstration site -- against the U.
S. invasion of Iraq -- when ordered by a member of the Army of Occupation of
Westchester County, despite the fact that the demonstrators had a "permit" to
do exactly what I was doing, at the time and place I was doing it. Twice, the
U. S. INjustice system has postponed trial, in a case which should be dismissed
out of hand. But, of course, that's part of the system. This takes up MY time
-- and that of my lawyer, whose time is worth more than I'm PAYING him.
Meanwhile, the judges, assistant district attorneys, court clerks, bailiffs,
stenotypists and other apparatchniks are being paid by MY taxes and the taxes
of other citizens and subjects of the United States. My son, Douglass, has
coined a lovely and apt phrase that I am proud to use: HYPOCRISY, NOT
DEMOCRACY!)
gens una sumus
Paul Rubin
> For starters, off the top of my head, GM Polgar has won the World
> Championship; she was the first female grandmaster (IGM, NOT WGM);
I don't know who the first female GM really was, but I'm pretty sure
Maya Chiburdanidze was one before Susan was. Your other comments are
correct.
Jerome Bibuld
Heil Dubya!
I'm STILL in the position of not having access to my personal library -- and
will be in that position for several more months, at least. I take your word
for Chiburdanidze, but add that Zsuzsa Polgar was, by far, the youngest woman
to earn the IGM title (until her sister Judit came along), if she was not the
first female IGM. I believe, also, that Chiburdanidze earned the title by
becoming the female World Champion, while Zsuzsa Polgar was the first to do it
with norms and her elevated ELO rating.
Thanks for you contribution.
Heute Uhmuhrikkka, Afghanistan und Irak. Morgen die ganze Welt!
Sam Sloan
<http://phr...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote:
The first woman to be awarded the grandmaster title but she did not
make the required norms. Thus, her title was essentially honorary.
Chibrudanidze also was awarded a similar title. Susan Polgar was the
first woman to WIN the title by aking the three required norms.
Sam Sloan
The Masked Bishop
"Jerome Bibuld" <chess...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20031231125537...@mb-m21.aol.com...
The Masked Bishop
made numerous outrageous damaging unsubstantiated charges toward both of us
via
e-mail and over the Internet. <
But not, apparently, actionable, since the letter is merely a threat to stop
future remarks. Sorry, the violin-filled tales of raising children and
running chess centers ain't making it. If you can't stand the heat, get out
of the kitchen, and go sell washing machines at Sears. We'll find another
"distinguised grandmaster" to carry the ball, one with maybe a wee bit
thicker skin. Last I looked, there were piles of them, wearing sandwich
boards saying "will write chess column for cash."
TMB
"John Fernandez" <jcfern...@aol.commeepmeep> wrote in message
news:20031231125332...@mb-m05.aol.com...
Jerome Bibuld
Heil Dubya!
Then, of course, you don't speak to yourself. (That is supposed to be a sign
of sanity.)
LeModernCaveman
>threatened lawsuit. Best response to this is "see you in court, assholes."
>
>
>TMB (who remains anonymous for several reasons, this bullshit being one of
>them).
Not to burst your bubble, but for the purposes of a defamation lawsuit, you're
not posting anonymously.
To get your name, however, someone would have to convince a court that they had
grounds to discover it, but you post from Prodigy, and their records could
identify you if it ever came to that, which of course it hasn't.
The only posters who can get around this are anonymous remailers (or those from
obscure countries), but they lack credibility as a rule.
You may be "anonymous" in that no one knows who you are, but you are definitely
discoverable.
DISCLAIMER: I am not an attorney.
The Masked Bishop
whole approach, using Nazi imagery and fascist metaphors to dramatize your
political point, is incredibly damaging to the leftist cause. You are
correctly perceived by fence-sitters as a hysteric, an irrational demagogue,
just the kind of liberal they fear. You do our cause no good service with
your pseudo-Germanic wordplay and insistence that this county is now akin to
Nazi Germany. You cheapen the good work that is being done on the Left by
people who really care, and who really are trying to make a difference. Your
own self-dramatization, as some kind of martyr to public demonstration, does
nothing to illustrate the very real issues and concerns that left-thinking
people have about our government and its leaders. You serve your own ego,
and nothing else.
No-one can care about the potential legitimacy of your complaints because
your presentation is so childish, inappropriate, and self-absorbed. You are
destructive to the very causes you claim to champion. Indeed, you are
Reichsfuhrer Ashcroft's best friend, for all he has to do is point to people
like you and say "is that the kind of person who should select our leaders?
Are those the notions that should guide our governance?" And when they turn
to regard you, clownish Cassandra, how easy it is to say no.
TMB
"Jerome Bibuld" <chess...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20031231133012...@mb-m21.aol.com...
LeModernCaveman
>made numerous outrageous damaging unsubstantiated charges toward both of us
>via
>e-mail and over the Internet. <
>
>But not, apparently, actionable, since the letter is merely a threat to stop
>future remarks.
In other words, they're trying to mitigate their damages by bringing the
conduct to the attention of the offending party.
Whether or not they'd prevail in an actual lawsuit is another story.
Generally, badmouthing people carries a risk of being sued.
The Masked Bishop
me, bring it on. I remain anonymous, however, to avoid the standard rounds
of character assassination that tend to frequent the usenet. This "letter"
to Tim Hanke is more of the same--an attempt to smear his character and
intimidate open discussion. It might pass in Hungary or Vietnam, where
censorship and intimidation are still a way of life, but not here.
As far as lawsuits, you would know, wouldn't you?
"LeModernCaveman" <lemoder...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20031231134507...@mb-m18.aol.com...
Matt Nemmers
news:1VEIb.16550$aw2.9...@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...
Bravo, TMB. Bra-VO.
Regards,
Matt
Angelo DePalma
99% of the time nothing happens. These letters make the recipient think
twice about saying or writing something which could possibly be libelous,
however. Which is generally good unless the charge is fabricated.
Tim, could what you posted be construed as libelous? You don't have to
answer that!
A year after my dot-bomb fired me 3 years ago I emailed someone still at the
company to let her know what I thought of her. That resulted in a similarly
archaically-worded "Let it be known hitherto and thitherthon, inasmuch as
whereupon..." warning from their lawyers that I was not to communicate with
anyone still working there or I would be forced to return my severance pay
and pay unspecified "damages." The letter had no teeth, legally, as my
termination agreement said nothing about such communications. However, it
did bring me to my senses. Somewhat.
A 0.00000000072% chance of being financially ruined is a lot scarier than a
99% chance of stubbing your toe.
Angelo
"Bruce Draney" <bdr...@novia.net> wrote in message
news:3FF301...@novia.net...
Angelo DePalma
Yeah, yeah, yeah it will take 10 years to come to trial and the lawyers
won't take it on contingency and they won't win and all that. But in this
case, discretion is clearly the better part of "valor". Professionally run
organizations prohibit officers and employees from commenting in public
forums, especially on matters substantive to their business. That includes
commenting on leading personalities, ethics, etc. I interview dozens of CEOs
and upper managers each year, and they almost always have their PR person
with them before they go out on a limb.
I don't know what Tim posted or if it's legally suspect. However, it could
not possibly hurt for USCF officers to remain above the fray of the insanity
on this newsgroup.
Angelo
"Tim Hanke" <timoth...@comcast.net> wrote in message
Angelo DePalma
your ankles listening to a collection of GWB's speeches.
"Jerome Bibuld" <chess...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20031231132228...@mb-m21.aol.com...
John Swartz
Sam Sloan wrote:
>
> On 31 Dec 2003 07:14:21 -0800, mlem...@home.com (John Lamont) wrote:
>
> >I did a search and haven't found anything about Mr. Hanke attacking
> >Susan for cheating or really anything else, though he did criticize
> >her choice as GM of the year. I happen to agree with him on that, but
> >nevermind. On the other hand even if he did say she cheated using
> >PTruong and a computer online (which I don't see why she would
> >bother), there's no way a libel suit would succeed as he can simply
> >state it is his opinion that it is so, and Ms. Polgar would have to
> >prove definitively that she did not cheat to succeed in a lawsuit, and
> >that would be hard to do.
>
> Tim Hanke did not say that in a posting to this newsgroup, but he did
> say that in a letter to a list which included the Executive Board, the
> Executive Director and numerous chess politicos.
I don't suppose we'd get to see this letter - I would assume that if
this letter is the "evidence" that Polgar/Truong are using, then posting
it here might only futher their case.
So, has Sam Sloan seen this letter? He seems to feel that Polgar has a
case. It is interesting that he feels Polgar has such a strong case
when after he first announced that Tim Hanke accussed Polgar of
cheating, he later qualified his statement to:
"OK. I stand corrected. Timothy Hanke accused Zsuzsa Polgar of allowing
moves to be played in her name aided by a chess computer program named
Crafty.
Sam Sloan"
There must be more to it than that...
Then again, Sam Sloan also publicly accused Tim Hanke of making advances
toward Polgar, as well as many accusation of his mental stability and
fitness to represent the USCF. Hmm...
John
LeModernCaveman
>me, bring it on. I remain anonymous, however, to avoid the standard rounds
>of character assassination that tend to frequent the usenet. This "letter"
>to Tim Hanke is more of the same--an attempt to smear his character and
>intimidate open discussion. It might pass in Hungary or Vietnam, where
>censorship and intimidation are still a way of life, but not here.
>
>As far as lawsuits, you would know, wouldn't you?
I know that libel cases are generally a last resort. They aren't pretty from
any side.
Jerome Bibuld
Heil Dubya!
Chuck you, too, Farley!
LeModernCaveman
ADD DISCLAIMER: I am not a FUCKING attorney.
StanB
character. They did this as a defamation of our character. I for one intend
to seek compensation.
StanB
StanB
> Perhaps someone has hit upon a new method of funding the Olympiad
> Women's team?
>
> You know, I don't recollect Tim ever saying ANYTHING on RGCP about
> Polgar, but I remember Sam Sloan posting one of his "exclusives" about
> it. Maybe they could sue Sam Sloan for saying something that Hanke had
> allegedly said or done, but I doubt it. Now I do think that Booz has
> criticized both of them, but I don't remember Hanke saying much of
> anything.
Sam is judgment proof. I can document everything I said.
StanB
StanB
> "By the same token, IBM's alleged involvement is probably a
> complete fantasy, like the 1,000 letters a month Truong
> claims that Susan Polgar gets for her openings column in
> Chess Life." - Timothy Hanke (29 Dec 2003 18:11:06 PST)
It will be interesting to see how you can substantiate your resume.
Falsifying a resume is illegal in most states.
StanB
StanB
"Sam Sloan" <sl...@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:3ff2fe2b...@ca.news.verio.net...
> Tim Hanke did not say that in a posting to this newsgroup, but he did
> say that in a letter to a list which included the Executive Board, the
> Executive Director and numerous chess politicos.
>
> I disagree with your legal conclusion. If Hanke said that for example
> that Sam Sloan cheated by using a computer in an Internet Chess Game,
> it is very doubtful that I would have much grounds for suit. However,
> Hanke said that a distinguished grandmaster and former World Champion
> Susan Polgar cheated in a chess game. I feel that she will prevail in
> the lawsuit, unless Hanke has some evidence to support his claim.
Confidential e-mails among board members to discuss someone who was to head
our WOT are quite appropriate.
StanB
StanB
> I still think it's mostly bluster and threat by the plaintiffs.
> Usually such tactics carry a significant risk and they almost never go
> to court. If they do go to court, they almost never succeed.
A desperate attempt by a couple of losers that can't face the fact that
people can see through them.
StanB
Bruce Draney
Just wondering what this has to do with falsifying a resume?
I doubt that falsifying a resume is prosecuted in very many cases,
unless the falsification involves perjury, such as being hired by the
Secret Service or the FBI.
Wasn't it George O'Leary who got nailed when he took the Notre Dame job
for having made up a bunch of stuff on his resume to make it look
better? I don't think anyone in either Georgia or Indiana was pursuing
criminal charges against him.
In fact he landed a job somewhere as an assistant coach although the
team escapes me.
So Stan, are you planning on counter suing?
Happy New Year.
Best Regards,
Bruce
StanB
> My bubble is not burst. Anyone who thinks they have a legal issue against
> me, bring it on. I remain anonymous, however, to avoid the standard rounds
> of character assassination that tend to frequent the usenet. This "letter"
> to Tim Hanke is more of the same--an attempt to smear his character and
> intimidate open discussion. It might pass in Hungary or Vietnam, where
> censorship and intimidation are still a way of life, but not here.
My guess is they went whining to some lawyer and asked him to sue. He
probably looked at there so-called evidence and said they didn't have a
case. Then he might of suggested sending us a letter incorporating some
innuendo just to mollify them. What exactly are their damages? What exactly
are the perceived mistruths?
StanB
Sam Sloan
wrote:
Sorry. I did not proof read this before posting this. What I means to
write was:
Nona Gaprindashvili was he first woman to be awarded the grandmaster
title but she did not make the required norms. She did have one very
good tournament at Lone Pine, which she won, but her result was not
quite good enough for a grandmaster norm. Thus, her title was
StanB
"Jerome Bibuld" <chess...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
> Chuck you, too, Farley!
There's Jerome make a racist remark about Paul Troung. For shame.
StanB
Sam Sloan
wrote:
That remark will get them punitive damages.
Sam Sloan
Sam Sloan
wrote:
>It will be interesting to see how you can substantiate your resume.
>Falsifying a resume is illegal in most states.
>
>StanB
I have been saying that for a long time and that is why we should put
George DeFeis in prison as I am convinced that he falsified his
resume.
Do you really believe that George DeFeis had a masters degree in
business administration from the Bernard Baruch School of Finance?
What an idiot!!
Sam Sloan
Mike Murray
wrote:
>On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 16:47:42 -0500, "StanB" <stan...@comXXXcast.net>
>wrote:
>>StanB
Aren't they public figures?
Fifiela
As far as I call tell, you're not FUCKING anything.
Fifiela
Maya Chiburdanidze was one before Susan was. Your other comments are
correct.>>>
I beleive that Maya was an WGM and anyway clearly not in the same league in
terms of playing strength with Susan Polgar.
Paul Rubin
> I beleive that Maya was an WGM and anyway clearly not in the same
> league in terms of playing strength with Susan Polgar.
I'm pretty sure she was a GM, and the claim wasn't about playing
strength. Susan Polgar's nowhere near Gary Kasparov in playing
strength and yet that doesn't make her a non-GM.
The Masked Bishop
Sue me?
TMB
"Sam Sloan" <sl...@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:3ff34836...@ca.news.verio.net...
The Masked Bishop
Chess world (hey, she's slumming in Chess Life) will nose-dive. Live by
Truong, die by Troung. We are better off without the pair of them; how
pleasant that they sharpened their own sword to fall on.
"StanB" <stan...@comXXXcast.net> wrote in message
news:XfWdnXpFCu0...@comcast.com...
skoonj
Minnesota Vikings. And I believe he was recently hired as the HC at Central
Florida.
KidDon
______________________________
Hopefully, Susan's lawyer warned her in advance that a public figure
such as herself having such a cease and desist letter sent to a public
figure such as Tim would likely result in no more than the underlying
accusations being repeated over and over by various people on usenet
(Sam Sloan, et al....), thereby doing little other than further
damaging her character (assuming any damage has been done). In my
opinion, this threat of legal action was the wrong approach. The way
for a public figure to respond to such matters is to either: a.
have thick enough skin to ignore the b.s.; or b. combat free speach
with free speach of her own to correct the record, not to make threats
of legal action that will likely never happen.
KidDon
Jerome Bibuld
Heil Dubya!
Maya Chiburdanidze was a legitimate IGM; don't let the male supremacists and
Soviet baiters kid you. As for her being "clearly ... in the same league in
terms of playing strength," she definitely was. In fact, her rating went up,
as I recall, in the year after FIDE -- on the recommendation of Arpad Elo --
adjusted the women's rating system, while Zsuzsa Polgar's rating went down.
(Remember, however, that Ms. Polgar was the only woman who did not have her
rating adjusted at that time.) Around that time, iirc, their ratings were
comparable -- never a difference of more than 25 points.
Angelo DePalma
Otherwise, may a very large building fall on you.
adp
"Jerome Bibuld" <chess...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20031231153842...@mb-m16.aol.com...
Angelo DePalma
"Mike Murray" <mikem...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:e8j6vvkiov38r3dmu...@4ax.com...
Angelo DePalma
It's very similar to molecular biology. Some posters on here only share
about 10% of their genes with the human race. Nonetheless we refer to them
as "people."
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xoetoi...@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
Angelo DePalma
business involved that was also hurt. That doesn't mean you can't lose a lot
of money.
The good news is their lawyer probably charged them $3000 to write that
pathetic letter. "Inasmuch as whereupon, please kindly be advised that the
aforementioned situation to which I am referring (vide supra)..."
adp
"StanB" <stan...@comXXXcast.net> wrote in message
news:Xt-dnWTCQKb...@comcast.com...
Neil Brennen
>
> It's very similar to molecular biology. Some posters on here only share
> about 10% of their genes with the human race. Nonetheless we refer to them
> as "people."
Angelo DePalma is a "person".
Angelo DePalma
"Angelo DePalma" <adpspamme...@tellurian.net> wrote in message
news:j6CdnSneBb2...@garden.net...
John Fernandez
--------------
The issues involving Mr. Hanke and Mr. Booz are different. I definitely would
not waste my time or energy with just what they posted here (which are no where
as serious as what they had circulated in e-mails). They clearly could not
support their outrageous fabricated charges in these e-mails. In fact, the
charges they brought up were soundly refuted by some current and past board
members, high-level staff at New Windsor and a number well known people in the
chess community.
However, this is not a case for this forum and I am not going to discuss it
here. This is also not a bluff. We are not playing poker here. I deal only
with facts, not innuendoes or personal vendetta. It does not even make sense
to speculate what they have done. I have absolutely no doubt that their claims
can be easily and decisively rebutted. It is entirely up to Mr. Hanke and Mr.
Booz to decide if this case should go forward or not. As I previously stated,
if these men decide to continue on the same path, I will have no choice but to
defend myself vigorously and they will be held accountable for their actions.
I would like to thank all the people who have brought some of the postings to
my attention. This is the last time I will comment on this.
A few of you have sent me e-mails asking me to clarify about women who earned
GM titles. Women's World Champions Chiburdanidze and Gaprindashvili were both
awarded GM titles prior to me for winning the Women's World Championships. I
think they both have earned a GM norm each. WWC Gaprindashvili never reached
2500. I don’t believe she even came close. WWC Chiburdanidze reached 2500
the first time when FIDE awarded women players 100 free points (except me).
She has maintained her rating around that mark since. However, I was the first
woman to earn the GM title through both norms and rating qualification just as
men do. I received my last norm at the end of 1990 / beginning of 1991. Judit
was the second to do so (about a year later), followed by P. Cramling, A.
Stefanova and H. Koneru.
Best Wishes and Happy New Year!
Susan Polgar
Bill Brock
(*munching on popcorn*) Jeepers, Stan, you're hopelessly P.C.
See you on Atrios!
Neil Brennen
"John Fernandez" <jcfern...@aol.commeepmeep> wrote in message
news:20040101023415...@mb-m07.aol.com...
> From Susan Polgar:
John, why are you acting as messenger boy for GM Trollgar? I thought that
was Truong's job.
I'll leave aside the natural questions concerning the wisdom of Trollgar
posting inflammatory matter after engaging a lawyer.
Sam Sloan
wrote:
>People don't go to prison for fake resumes, Sam. God, you are so clueless.
>
>Sue me?
>
>TMB
>
But in this case, the false resume enabled him to get a job which
caused the USCF to lose one million dollars, which put the USCF in the
position where it is today.
Sam Sloan
StanB
"KidDon" <tampac...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:9fa25c25.03123...@posting.google.com...
> ______________________________
> Hopefully, Susan's lawyer warned her in advance that a public figure
> such as herself having such a cease and desist letter sent to a public
> figure such as Tim would likely result in no more than the underlying
> accusations being repeated over and over by various people on usenet
> (Sam Sloan, et al....), thereby doing little other than further
> damaging her character (assuming any damage has been done). In my
> opinion, this threat of legal action was the wrong approach. The way
> for a public figure to respond to such matters is to either: a.
> have thick enough skin to ignore the b.s.; or b. combat free speach
> with free speach of her own to correct the record, not to make threats
> of legal action that will likely never happen.
I don't know about her but Paul posts here all the time. He just doesn't
have the balls to sign his name to what he writes.
StanB
StanB
StanB
"Angelo DePalma" <adpspamme...@tellurian.net> wrote in message
news:Su-dneAqtsI...@garden.net...
The Masked Bishop
Bye-bye, Susan.
"Neil Brennen" <chessno...@mindnospamspring.com> wrote in message
news:CqQIb.3546$6B....@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Parrthenon
By Larry Parr
"Nowadays lawyers are replacing good moves on the chessboard." -- GM Larry
Evans (2001).
I don't know what the basis is for these threats or why Mr. Fernandez is
posting on behalf of Susan Polgar.
I do know that in 1988 our FIDE delegate Don Schultz sued GM Larry Evans for
$21 million for libel and defamation of character. It was tossed out of court
after costing Don a lot of money. GM Evans refused to settle by paying $1 and
apologizing because his reporting was true. Even if it was false, however, Don
as a public figure had to prove not only monetary damages but also MALICE -- an
almost impossible hurdle for the plaintiff. Don later conceded in his book
CHESSDON that his lawsuit was a mistake. In the end it backfired and injured
only his own reputation.
As usual in such cases, the only victors are the lawyers.
Unlike KidDon, who has offered sensible advice, I am not a lawyer. But I
know that just deciding which court has jurisdiction is likely to drag on for
months if not years.
My main concern is that such cases have a chilling effect on free speech.
EditorialStaff
>
>> The Masked Bishop wrote:
>>
>> As far as lawsuits, you would know, wouldn't you?
>
> I know that libel cases are generally a last resort.
> They aren't pretty from any side.
Especially when the Judge nonsuits you. Just like when
you tried to sue UPenn's student newspaper for making
you look like more of an idiot than you yourself normally
do. DISMISSED! Thrown out of court... As usual.
How's your new RICO 2.0 case coming against the 200 John Does?
It hasn't shown up on PACER yet, but when it does, you can
rest assured we'll publish all of it. Every last bit.
Ready for a new round of publicity showing how much of a
snivelling git you are? How much of an Inexcusable Failure
you can be?
We're ready.
And you can't do a thing about it.
Nothing.
---
-
The Editorial Staff
-----
A quote from "Ray Gordon"
"(For a dissenting opinion on my character, please visit
the following website: http://members.tripod.com/~rayfaq.html)*
This site contains many lies about me, but as a defender of
free speech I fully support its right to exist."
-Message-ID: <6ertau$76b$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
*The original RayFAQ was removed from the internet as a
result of dozens of complaints from Gordon Roy Parker.
The site has been updated, and can now be found at:
http://www.ray-gordon.com If Mr. Parker feels that the
original site is is significantly different, he should
upload it to the internet, so everyone can compare the two.
Freedom of Speech is WORTHLESS without Social Responsibility.
The OFFICIAL Ray Gordon FAQ: http://www.ray-gordon.com
Everything you need to know about Usenet's biggest NewsLoon!
BACK by POPULAR DEMAND! For an UNlimited time!
39,000+ Satisfied Visitors, 1 Disgruntled Malcontent.
-=-
This message was posted via two or more anonymous remailing services.
Neil Brennen
"Parrthenon" <parrt...@cs.com> wrote in message
news:20040101113850...@mb-m03.news.cs.com...
> ABSENCE OF MALICE?
>
> By Larry Parr
>
> "Nowadays lawyers are replacing good moves on the chessboard." -- GM
Larry
> Evans (2001).
>
> I don't know what the basis is for these threats or why Mr. Fernandez
is
> posting on behalf of Susan Polgar.
>
> I do know that in 1988 our FIDE delegate Don Schultz sued GM Larry
Evans for
> $21 million for libel and defamation of character. It was tossed out of
court
> after costing Don a lot of money. GM Evans refused to settle by paying $1
and
> apologizing because his reporting was true. Even if it was false, however,
Don
> as a public figure had to prove not only monetary damages but also
MALICE -- an
> almost impossible hurdle for the plaintiff. Don later conceded in his book
> CHESSDON that his lawsuit was a mistake. In the end it backfired and
injured
> only his own reputation.
Agreed. ChessDon blundered badly.
> As usual in such cases, the only victors are the lawyers.
> Unlike KidDon, who has offered sensible advice, I am not a lawyer. But
I
> know that just deciding which court has jurisdiction is likely to drag on
for
> months if not years.
> My main concern is that such cases have a chilling effect on free
speech.
I think that's the point, Larry. Someone wants to chill free speech.
Excellent post, BTW.
Ron Suarez
This is a very appropriate and accurate post.
Ron Suarez
Neil Brennen
"The Masked Bishop" <t...@c4.com> wrote in message
news:RmXIb.16704$aw2.9...@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com...
> It's all so pathetic. From chess star to litigant, in one short season.
> Bye-bye, Susan.
She might be getting bad advice from her handlers.
Bruce Draney
Polgar has something to say on this forum why doesn't she come on here
and say it instead of making up some phoney baloney excuse to have John
be her errand boy?
I'm disappointed that John would stoop to becoming messenger boy for
someone else. That is normally the caliber of conduct expected from Sam
Sloan.
This is not meant to be a commentary on the substance of GM Polgar's
claims about Hanke and Booz, but more of a comment on John involving
himself. He ought to set his standards higher than this.
Best Regards,
Bruce
Neil Brennen
Agreed. John shouldn't be acting as spokesperson for Trollgar.
sandirhodes
"Neil Brennen" wrote
> "Parrthenon" wrote
> > My main concern is that such cases have a chilling effect on free
> speech.
>
> I think that's the point, Larry. Someone wants to chill free speech.
> Excellent post, BTW.
"Every once in awhile, declare peace ... it confuses the hell out of your enemies." --Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #76
John Fernandez
She's sending me the posts asking me to post them. That's why.
John Fernandez
John Fernandez
>From: Bruce Draney bdr...@novia.net
>Date: 1/1/2004 1:46 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <3FF46A...@novia.net>
Someone sends me an e-mail and asks me to post it, wtf do you want me to do,
Bruce? Yeesh.
John Fernandez
Paul Rubin
> It's all so pathetic. From chess star to litigant, in one short season.
> Bye-bye, Susan.
Susan's been in a bunch of lawsuits before, it seems to me. I don't
know whether this potential new one has any merit, but I don't see how
she can make her reputation worse than the USCF's already is.
The Masked Bishop
Disappointed, but not surprised. John has shown great capacity for stoopage
on a variety of issues, most of which he's firmly been on the wrong side.
"Bruce Draney" <bdr...@novia.net> wrote in message
news:3FF46A...@novia.net...
The Masked Bishop
bellyaching. You do yourself no good by joining this vendatta.
"John Fernandez" <jcfern...@aol.commeepmeep> wrote in message
news:20040101145036...@mb-m20.aol.com...
RSHaas
someone else..." (Bruce Draney)
=============
Ummm... Bruce, while it is not a big deal with me, didn't Neil Brennen
recently thank you here for emailing to him one or another of my rcgp posts.
Isn't that pretty much the same thing or are you a go-fer of another
color?
RSHaas
RSHaas
> Best Regards,
> Bruce
Agreed. John shouldn't be acting as spokesperson for Trollgar. (Neil Brennen)
===============
But its OK for Bruce to send you by email one or another of my rgcp posts
because you have me killfiled.
You even thanked him for his go-ferness right here on rgcp.
RSHaas
Bruce Draney
No. I have not mailed Neil Brennen any RGCP posts by you or anyone
else.
Best Regards,
Bruce
Bruce Draney
I never did this. You apparently are confused about something.
Best Regards,
Bruce
Bruce Draney
Gosh John, is this a trick question? If your mom told you to drink
rubbing alcohol would you do it?
Does GM Polgar have paralyzed fingers or something? Should we be
sending donations to help her recover her ability to speak for herself
or type internet messages to this forum?
Did she forget how to post to RGCP or does she just feel she can have
an appointed sock puppet post things for her? Are you being paid to
post for her or is there some other reason she turns to you?
Best Regards,
Bruce
Sam Sloan
I agree with you about the 1989 ChessDon suit against Larry Evans
(which is posted on my website). http://www.samsloan.com/lawsuit.htm
However, I disagree about the Polgar matter.
The suit by Don Schultz against Larry Evans was completely foolish.
The suit was not so much about reporting but was about an online
debate between Schultz and Evans on Leisure Linc. It was unbelievable
tha Schultz, having done badly in the debate, would sue Evans. More
than that, Schultz claimed that the debate had cost him a chance to
become President of FIDE. Don Schultz had NO CHANCE to become
president of FIDE because this was during the Cold War and neither an
American nor a Russian could have become president of FIDE at that
point in time. Finally, almost nobody in FIDE read Leisure Linc or
were familiar with its contents. Thus, the postings on Leisure Linc
could not have impacted the desire of Don Schultz to become President
of FIDE.
The Polgar case is entirely different. There have been more than one
hundred unprovoked newsgroup postings by Tim Hanke and Stan Booz
personally attacking Zsuzsa Polgar. These postings have continued up
until this minute. There is no doubt that Zsuzsa Polgar is a public
figure in the World of Chess and under New York Times vs. Sullivan she
must prove actual malice to prevail. However, this will not pose any
problem at all. One hundred newsgroup postings viciously and
personally attacking Zsuzsa Polgar wirthout even one posting by Polgar
attacking Tim Hanke or Stan Booz is more than enough to prove actual
malice. Moreover, there are several witnesses to the fact that Tim
Hanke approached Zsuzsa Polgar sexually and made sexually suggestive
remarks to her during the meetings in Los Angeles and thereafter. With
Tim Hanke now the USCF VP of Finance and Zsuzsa Polgar a chess
columnist writing articles for Chess Life magazine, there is a clear
employer-employee relationship and Zsuzsa Polgar has strong grounds
for a federal sexual harassment suit.
I do not believe that Zsuzsa Polgar is bluffing. I believe that she
will file suit very soon and that she will prevail.
Sam Sloan
Neil Brennen
I'm sure he's confused about a lot of things. You do remember that last week
he attributed to me some comment by Richard Peterson.
I await his "proof" that you email me RSHaasbeen posts. Well, to be precise,
I don't await it, because I won't see it unless someone quotes it. Perhaps I
should let him out of the killfile for a little while? His "proof" should be
amusing.
Neil Brennen
Neil Brennen
Testing a new signature line. Do you like it?
Neil Brennen
--
Bruce, while it is not a big deal with me, didn't Neil Brennen recently
thank you here for emailing to him one or another of my rcgp [sic] posts
-RSHaas
.
No. I have not mailed Neil Brennen any RGCP posts by you or anyone else.
Best Regards,
Bruce
But its OK for Bruce to send you by email one or another of my rgcp posts
because you have me killfiled.
- RSHaas
I never did this. You apparently are confused about something.
Best Regards,
Bruce
(So much for "not a big deal".)
John Fernandez
>Are you being paid to
>post for her or is there some other reason she turns to you?
No.
None that I'm aware of.
Man, if I was getting paid like you and Parr claim I'd be much better off
financially.
John Fernandez
joe mccarron
First, if Tim Hanke is making factually false statements about SP,
then Susan Polgar is acting entirely appropriately. Contacting a
lawyer is a good way to let someone know that you believe they have
stepped over the line in their publication of misinformation and would
like them to stop. Proof that it was effective here would be if Tim
Hanke does not continue to publish his e-mail letter(that may have
stated she cheated) on this news group. If the letter is untrue, That
would be another libel. If he doesn't again publish his same
allegations it would show that he is reconsidering how loose he will
be with his tongue when it comes to other peoples reputations. This
is a good thing! Unless he has strong evidence to support his claims
he shouldn't publish this accuasation again.
I also think a distinction shoudl be made between statemetns of
opinion or statements of fact. If I say SP is a jerk that is a
statement of opinion. That would generally not be acitonable. Sure
she coudl call witnesses to testify she is not a jerk and that she is
really nice etc., but by and large it woudl not be actionable because
that is just my opinion.
If however I say she cheated in a chess match by using a computer or
having someone else help her with the moves that is a completely
different creature. That is clearly factual and if I have no good
evidence to make that statement then morally and legally I should not
be spreadign this claim.
Malice: Generally the malice that needs to be proved in slander or
libel cases means that the person saying them had a reckless disregard
for the truth. It generally does not mean that she needs to prove he
hates her or somehtign like that. Although the law varies from state
to state gennerally she does not need to prove that he actually *knew*
his statement was false.
If she were to prevail that does not mean everyone here woudl have
good claims for harmfull things said here. That is becasue many of
us don't depend on our reputations in thsi chess community to make
lots of money. At least I don't someone may accuse me of cheating at
chess but unless it spilled over to somethign I coudl prove economic
damages over I wouldn't have a great claim.
In short Susan acting properly. This discussion in this thread is
misguided. It shouldn't revolve around whether she should seek legal
assisatnce for her perceived injustice. It shoudl revolve around
whether Tim Hanke did publish unfounded false accusations and if so
what basis did he have to make the accusations.
I'm not familiar with he Larry Evans Don Schultz case but I'm sure you
woudl admit its not logical to say Shultz case was a mistake therefore
so is Susan's.
parrt...@cs.com (Parrthenon) wrote in message news:<20040101113850...@mb-m03.news.cs.com>...
The Masked Bishop
Hanke approached Zsuzsa Polgar sexually and made sexually suggestive
remarks to her during the meetings in Los Angeles and thereafter<
This is so obviously outrageous Sloanism, it doesn't even bear comment. And
hell, if it was ME, not only would there have been suggestive remarks, but
the said lass would be giggling into my pillow right now. TMB doesn't mess
around.
What does matter is that this lawsuit so far appears to have three
supporters on this board:
LeModern Caveman (no stranger to legal frivolities himself)
Sam Sloan (nothing need more be said)
John Fernandez (whom we would have thought would know better -- that he
doesn't requires a sad re-evaluation of his own character).
Ah, tis a said day for RGCP, but it was only a matter of time, in our
McCourt society, that someone's feathers finally got so ruffled they ran to
1-800-SUESOMEONE. What's tragic here is that the only loser will be Susan
Polgar...those other camp followers who are tagging along, including those
named above and her business manager, never had anything to lose in the
first place.
TMB
"Sam Sloan" <sl...@ishipress.com> wrote in message
news:3ff4abe6....@ca.news.verio.net...
Paul Rubin
> I do not believe that Zsuzsa Polgar is bluffing. I believe that she
> will file suit very soon and that she will prevail.
I don't think she's bluffing either--she's a tough cookie and if she
says she's going to file a suit, she very well might do it. As
Schultz-Evans and the Peterson affair show, chess people file suits
all the time. However, I don't think the stuff that's been posted to
rgcp is enough for her suit to get anywhere on, and I haven't seen the
mailing list messages that she's complaining about.
Neil Brennen
> What does matter is that this lawsuit so far appears to have three
> supporters on this board:
>
> LeModern Caveman (no stranger to legal frivolities himself)
> Sam Sloan (nothing need more be said)
> John Fernandez (whom we would have thought would know better -- that he
> doesn't requires a sad re-evaluation of his own character).
Fernandez hasn't said he supports the lawsuit, but his behavior as
Trollgar's errand boy is a little odd.
> Ah, tis a said day for RGCP, but it was only a matter of time, in our
> McCourt society, that someone's feathers finally got so ruffled they ran
to
> 1-800-SUESOMEONE.
Should I mention I sent a few emails like the Trollgar letter to the ISP of
a RGCP poster in February 2003? I won't leap to the conclusion that my
emails had an effect, but this person stopped posting for several months.
I'll let you guess who it is.
What's tragic here is that the only loser will be Susan
> Polgar...those other camp followers who are tagging along, including those
> named above and her business manager, never had anything to lose in the
> first place.
I'm not sure that Trollgar will be a loser - except perhaps in any lawsuit
filed. How many times have ChessDon and Tim Redman come back from the dead?
Paul Rubin
> supporters on this board:
>
> LeModern Caveman (no stranger to legal frivolities himself)
> Sam Sloan (nothing need more be said)
> John Fernandez (whom we would have thought would know better -- that he
> doesn't requires a sad re-evaluation of his own character).
I haven't seen Fernandez supporting the lawsuit. I saw that he posted
some messages to rgcp for her at her request. I'd have been willing
to do the same thing, though I don't support the lawsuit.
Paul Rubin
> Proof that it was effective here would be if Tim
> Hanke does not continue to publish his e-mail letter(that may have
> stated she cheated) on this news group.
I don't think that letter has been published here.
The Masked Bishop
refrain from future comments. If he did indeed say actionable things in the
past, why is she not seeking redress for them? Hell, she doesn't even ask
for a retraction or an apology, much less mention whatever has put this bee
up her butt.
So no, I don't the Polgar letter has merit as it stands. It comes off as a
cheap threat to stop voicing negative opinions about her. If you've got a
case, make the case. Anything else is just empty threats and sour grapes.
"joe mccarron" <joemc...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:5f195d2e.04010...@posting.google.com...
Neil Brennen
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xk74bj...@ruckus.brouhaha.com...
Unless Trollgar has some sort of "smoking gun", I don't see this action as
successful. I say "Trollgar" since there are two people allegedly suing.
The Masked Bishop
to do the same thing, though I don't support the lawsuit.<
Toadies all. Listen to yourself.
"Paul Rubin" <http://phr...@NOSPAM.invalid> wrote in message
news:7xfzezj...@ruckus.brouhaha.com...