Judit Polgar is SUPERIOR to Susan Polgar
GM Susan Polgar
kidding aside, I am very proud of both Judit and Sofia.
Best wishes,
GM Susan Polgar
www.SusanPolgar.com
www.USScholasticChess.org
lemoder...@aol.com (LeModernCaveman) wrote in message news:<20031016185428...@mb-m20.aol.com>...
> That she is.
Wilma
not ... well, I'll live. :)
Wilma
"GM Susan Polgar" <Susan...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:5a21397a.03101...@posting.google.com...
Ben Finegold
When you post something so funny, put a comment in the subject. I was
eating, and now the food is all over the place! "Who changed her diapers!"
...LOL! Best post ever!
Ben
"GM Susan Polgar" <Susan...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:5a21397a.03101...@posting.google.com...
Nick
message news:<5a21397a.03101...@posting.google.com>...
> mhou...@aol.com-remove- (Mhoulsby) wrote in
> message news:<20031016220552...@mb-m06.aol.com>...
> > From: Susan...@aol.com (GM Susan Polgar)
> > Message-id: <5a21397a.03101...@posting.google.com>
> > > But who changed her diapers and taught her how to checkmate? :)
> > > All kidding aside, I am very proud of both Judit and Sofia.
> >
> > him. There's no doubting that your whole family's achievements (not least
> > those of your father - his book "Chess Training in 5333+1 Positions" is a
> > favourite of mine) are considerable.
> >
> > I suggest to you that perhaps you should consider a little more carefully
> > the intrinsic merits/demerits of a poster and his/her posts before
> > responding. Your being a GM might inadvertently afford such idiots a
> > credibility which is undeserved.
>
> Thank you for the caution. The problem is I do not know who is who.
> So far, most people have been courteous. But of course there are always
> a few exceptions.
Dear Ms. Polgar,
Fortunately, you have not been reading some of LeModernCaveman's recent posts
about you with regard to your divorce, particularly in the threads, "Susan
Polgar" (created by Paul Truong) and "Can someone explain this POLGAR DIVORCE
to me?" (created by "LeModernCaveman" himself). I shall not reproduce here
what "LeModernCaveman" wrote about you, but you should know that many readers
here were quite offended by LeModernCaveman's gratuitous insults and his
evident personal malice toward you. In many of his recent comments about you,
"LeModernCaveman" has been far from courteous, and I expect that other writers
here should be ready to corroborate the truth of that statement about him.
Best wishes.
--Nick
Mark Houlsby
Indeed, Nick, I can, and do, not only corroborate your assessment, but
cite my having independently reached the same conclusion as the reason
behind my having posted the caution to Zsuzsa which began this little
subthread.
Gordy's continuing to act like an idiot troll in this thread and
elsewhere should, one hopes, have alerted many people about his
evidently dubious motives and proclivities.
Mark
GM Susan Polgar
Thank you. I will no longer respond on this person's postings. It is
always sad to see such behavior. I have seen some of the malicious
postings falsely attacking Paul, Yasser and other chess advocates too.
On the other hand, I am glad to see posters like you.
Best wishes,
GM Susan Polgar
www.SusanPolgar.com
www.USScholasticChess.org
> > Thank you for the caution. The problem is I do not know who is who.
EWOH27
>always sad to see such behavior. I have seen some of the malicious
>postings falsely attacking Paul, Yasser and other chess advocates too.
> On the other hand, I am glad to see posters like you.
I just wanted to jump in and say how great it is to be able to discuss chess
with a real grandmaster like Ms. Polgar. As a high school chess club advisor,
I've been doing everything I can to get more girls interested in chess, but
it's tough, especially in a small school and with the relative lack of good
publicity for chess these daysl. I'm a very big fan of the accomplishments of
the Polgar sisters.
EZoto
Well there is one thing I'd like to say to Yasser.
Man do I miss that " Inside Chess " magazine. I collected them and
read them still. As always you don't know what you have until it is
gone.
EZoto
Nick
message news:<7xn0bxw...@ruckus.brouhaha.com>...
> lemoder...@aol.com (LeModernCaveman) writes:
> > Where was Susan's fine judgment on her wedding day?
>
> Obviously in retrospect things didn't go as hoped. This is one of those
> things you don't find out until afterwards. However, whatever error in
> judgement she may have made, she at least had good enough judgement to have
> nothing to do with YOU.
'Divorces are made in Heaven.'
--Oscar Wilde (The Importance of Being Earnest)
Did "LeModernCaveman" 'grow up' (if he ever has) in the Republic of Ireland?
> > Her sister JUDIT is 100 times more attractive (and a much better player)
> > anyway.
>
> I'm fine with both of them :)
I have had the pleasure of meeting Sofia Polgar, and she's fine with me too. :-)
'All really delightful things are sudden.'
--Oscar Wilde (The Picture of Dorian Gray)
--Nick
Paul Rubin
> > I'm fine with both of them :)
>
> I have had the pleasure of meeting Sofia Polgar, and she's fine with
> me too. :-)
I wasn't clear, I haven't met Susan or Judit but as far as I'm concerned
they're both great.
GM Susan Polgar
You won't find much if any :)
Best wishes,
GM Susan Polgar
www.SusanPolgar.com
www.USScholasticChess.org
"Wilma" <iamwilma...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<hMJjb.3564$7a4....@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net>...
> Is there a posted schedule of Judit's upcoming events? If so, where, and if> > Best wishes,
GM Susan Polgar
Best wishes,
GM Susan Polgar
www.SusanPolgar.com
www.USScholasticChess.org
GM Susan Polgar
title? You are more than strong enough. Good luck!
Best wishes,
GM Susan Polgar
www.SusanPolgar.com
www.USScholasticChess.org
"Ben Finegold" <fine...@comcast.net> wrote in message news:<qKGdnf3567u...@comcast.com>...
Ben Finegold
Getting my GM title is low on my list of priorities. There are not any
tournaments to play in with GM norms except the World Open and US
Championship. I will become a GM when I play enough tournaments with GM
norms, but I will not spend any extra money to accomplish this task. Wife
and kids and school and all....beats the heck out of chess! ...changing
diapers is fun too. :)
Wilma
study your opening analyses. Did I just miss it? Will it be back again? It's
easily my favorite column.
Isidor Gunsberg
> >Subject: Re: Judit Polgar is SUPERIOR to Susan Polgar
> >title? You are more than strong enough. Good luck!
>
> answering people's shocked queries of "why now?" with "Cause being a GM is
> cool, homes!"
Ah, but then he'd have to give up the chance to see his name get
bandied about, when the old thread "Strongest Players never to make
GM" comes up for discussion again.
Of course, maybe Goichberg offers 3x an IM's appearance fee, for
those who have a GM title.
EZoto
<fine...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Hey Susan,
>
>Getting my GM title is low on my list of priorities. There are not any
>tournaments to play in with GM norms except the World Open and US
>Championship. I will become a GM when I play enough tournaments with GM
>norms, but I will not spend any extra money to accomplish this task. Wife
>and kids and school and all....beats the heck out of chess! ...changing
>diapers is fun too. :)
>
>Ben
Do you ever consider giving a chess seminar to kids about what exactly
your talking about? A lot of kids get the so called fischer bug and
adults too. There is more to life than chess. If a person is a true
genuine talent it will rise to the top. Kids should use you as a role
model instead of Fischer.
EZoto
Ben Finegold
delay is. Most kids I know do not have role models. Teaching chess to kids
is fun, because they want to play chess!
Ben Finegold
"EZoto" <eucl...@eznet4u.com> wrote in message
news:95e9b5154ac2b510...@news.teranews.com...
Liam Too
> Most kids have not heard of Bobby Fischer. Most kids do not know what time
> delay is. Most kids I know do not have role models. Teaching chess to kids
> is fun, because they want to play chess!
>
> Ben Finegold
IMO:
1. Most kids, who know how to play chess, have heard of Bobby Fischer!
2. Most kids, who know how to play chess, also know how to use a chess
clock no matter what kind!
3. It's fun to watch kids, who know how to play chess, because they
are good enough to play the game due to their excellent role models
and teachers!
Lance Smith
PsyberZombie
>
> Thank you. I will no longer respond on this person's postings. It is
> always sad to see such behavior. I have seen some of the malicious
> postings falsely attacking Paul, Yasser and other chess advocates too.
> On the other hand, I am glad to see posters like you.
>
> Best wishes,
> GM Susan Polgar
> www.SusanPolgar.com
> www.USScholasticChess.org
>
>
> >
> > Dear Ms. Polgar,
> >
> > Fortunately, you have not been reading some of LeModernCaveman's recent posts
> > about you with regard to your divorce, particularly in the threads, "Susan
> > Polgar" (created by Paul Truong) and "Can someone explain this POLGAR DIVORCE
> > to me?" (created by "LeModernCaveman" himself). I shall not reproduce here
> > what "LeModernCaveman" wrote about you, but you should know that many readers
> > here were quite offended by LeModernCaveman's gratuitous insults and his
> > evident personal malice toward you. In many of his recent comments about you,
> > "LeModernCaveman" has been far from courteous, and I expect that other writers
> > here should be ready to corroborate the truth of that statement about him.
> >
> > Best wishes.
> > --Nick
»»» YIKES !!
It's Bad Enough when Cave·Dood haranges and wastes the Time of those of us
with nothing Better to do... but i guess it's even a BIGGER Thrill when he
can distract a World·Class Genius like Ms Polgar
Have you No Shame , Cave·Dood ??
ººººº
Nick
> Susan...@aol.com (GM Susan Polgar) wrote in message
> news:<5a21397a.03101...@posting.google.com>...
> > Thank you. I will no longer respond on this person's postings.
> > It is always sad to see such behavior. I have seen some of the malicious
> > postings falsely attacking Paul, Yasser and other chess advocates too.
> > On the other hand, I am glad to see posters like you.
> > Best wishes,
> > GM Susan Polgar
>
> can distract a World·Class Genius like Ms Polgar
> Have you No Shame, Cave·Dood ??
GM Susan Polgar has just written that she will no longer write any posts here.
Here are some excerpts from the RGCP thread, "Marshall Meeting":
On 22 October 2003, GM Susan Polgar wrote:
"This is very unfortunate. Lies are told and people believe them....
Mr. (Stan) Booz, GM Seirawan was not pleased with your remarks and style.
He has said so. I am not either. If you truly care about the USCF and the
future of chess, please kindly stop attacking people who are trying to do
good for the game. You have stated many incorrect and damaging statements
in this forum about a number of individuals including myself. What's done is
done. I am asking you nicely now to please stop insulting and attacking
GM Seirawan, Paul Truong or myself, directly or indirectly. Thank you."
Then Stan Booz ("StanB") wrote to GM Susan Polgar:
"...I don't particularyly give a damn what you or he (GM Yasser Seirawan) like
or don't like. He showed his colors years ago. Your colors are coming out now.
What I see is a silly person trying Sam Sloan-like tricks to put words in my
mouth. I haven't had anything to say about Yassir since so stop making up
stories. Stop hiding behind Yassir. Which statement damages you? Let me
say that the truth may be damaging but very permissible in this country.
As to Paul (Truong), he is a piece of shit and I'll say what I want whenever
I want about him. If you want to associate with the little worm, that's your
business but don't try to intimidate me with your distortions of the facts.
I am not so stupid nor are the readers here so easily taken in by your childish
ploys. I go easy on you because I do not think you write this. I sense that
Paul has access to your machine and writes this in your name....
Perhaps your English is not so good as you think. Here's my advice: Stick
with chess and stop trying to attract my attention. I am not impressed by
chess celebrities. I find them for the most part to be petty, self-important
and boorish. StanB"
Then GM Susan Polgar wrote to Stan Booz:
"You are quite a man with words. Thanks for your valuable contributions
to US Chess. You are truly a role model for our children."
(Clearly, GM Susan Polgar's reply to Stan Booz was intended as sarcasm.)
Then GM Susan Polgar wrote to John Lamont (evidently about Stan Booz):
"...Unfortunately, there are always a few lunatics in every bunch.
Therefore, I will follow Yasser out of this forum. *This will be the last
time that I will post in this forum.* ...I will continue to be a role model to
kids and courteous to all people alike. However, I cannot and will no longer
subject myself to this sort of trash in this forum. It is quite shocking for
me that some people can behave this way. This is not what I am used to and
I want no part of this sort of nonsense."
Here are some posts relating to the background of the dispute between
GM Susan Polgar and Stan Booz:
In the thread, "Susan Polgar" (9 September 2003), Stan Booz wrote:
"You don't really think she (GM Susan Polgar) wrote that do you?
She doesn't go to the bathroom without Paul's (Truong's) permission."
In the thread, "9-11" (11 September 2003), GM Susan Polgar wrote:
"Yes, I can speak on my own behalf in regard to my chess career and many other
topics, contrary to the statement by Mr. SBooz....Not only I can speak on my
own behalf, I can do it in 6-7 different languages. It is amazing that people
who know nothing about me can make statements about me like that and thinks
they know about my life better than me."
In the thread, "9-11" (12 September 2003), Stan Booz wrote to GM Susan Polgar:
"In this country you are judged by the company you keep."
In the thread, "Tim Hanke is Attacking Zsuzsa Polgar" (1 October 2003),
GM Susan Polgar wrote: "...Sam (Sloan) is correct in stating that no one
controls me. I have a group of trusted friends who advise me on various
issues. Ultimately, the decision is mine."
The reader may form his or her own judgment from that evidence.
'The crime of having been maligned unjustly.'
--Samuel Butler (Erewhon)
--Nick
The Masked Bishop
here.<
That's too bad, because it's always nice to have the perspective of someone
in the front lines of GM chess.
Susan was treated rudely here, and it's her choice to leave. She'll be
missed. It should be noted, however, that just because Susan is a GM (and a
woman) doesn't mean she should be treated any differently than anyone else
in here. Everyone is treated rudely, everyone is dissed. This is a rough
place, filled with venal, brainless people who often resort to obscenity
because they have nothing else to offer. We have a handful of true crazies
here in as well, nutcases who 20 years ago would have been hanging out in
shopping malls in dirty clothes, smelling of urine and muttering loudly to
themselves.
You have to really WANT to hang out in here, and if you can't stand the
heat, then by all means, leave the kitchen. But don't expect the kitchen to
get remodeled anytime soon!
TMB
The Modern Caveman
Why?
Nick
news:<JOanb.4896$P%1.42...@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com>...
> Nick wrote:
> > GM Susan Polgar has just written that she will no longer write any
> > posts here.
>
> That's too bad, because it's always nice to have the perspective of
> someone in the front lines of GM chess.
> Susan was treated rudely here, and it's her choice to leave. She'll be missed.
How often has that been said only after someone has gone?
> It should be noted, however, that just because Susan is a GM (and a woman)
> doesn't mean she should be treated any differently than anyone else in here.
In April 2003, GM Mikhail Golubev wrote some critical posts here about the war
in Iraq, for which he was personally attacked by some Americans (such as Stan
Booz and Tim Hanke) who passionately supported the United States's invasion.
As far as I know, GM Mikhail Golubev has not written any more posts here.
In the thread, "A new enemy of Lev Khariton" (17 April 2003),
GM Mikhail Golubev wrote to one of his American critics, Matt Nemmers:
"Compared to Kasparov, I am player of no caliber at all, but I can't see that
Kasparov is almost the only GM who comments on Iraq publickly, while his
position in eyes of many of his colleagues is very close to be pro-fascist.
That's also why I found it possible to express my foolish political views."
In the same thread, "A new enemy of Lev Khariton" (16 April 2003),
Simon Spivack ('Chapman billy') wrote:
"I do not agree with much that GM Golubev writes on the Iraq crisis.
Feelings are raw, and when there is emotion, much that should be left
unsaid is uttered....What I do say is that we do not have enough players
of GM Golubev's calibre contributing to this group, they should be treated
with greater respect to encourage their participation."
Then in that same thread, Simon Spivack ('Chapman billy') wrote:
"I am not claiming that any one person's opinion is necessarily more valuable
than another, merely that there are not enough players of IM+ strenth posting,
and thus a little consideration may help address this."
> Everyone is treated rudely, everyone is dissed. This is a rough place,
> filled with venal, brainless people who often resort to obscenity because
> they have nothing else to offer. We have a handful of true crazies here in
> as well, nutcases who 20 years ago would have been hanging out in shopping
> malls in dirty clothes, smelling of urine and muttering loudly to themselves.
Evidently, even 'a little consideration' is too much to ask for or to expect
from too many writers here. These chess newsgroups (particularly RGCP) seem
to behave according to an analogue of Gresham's Law (Bad money tends to drive
good money out of circulation.): Abusive writers tend to drive away thoughtful
writers. By doing that, only the abusive writers 'win'--everyone else loses.
Queen Gertrude: The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
--William Shakespeare (Hamlet)
--Nick
Jay McKeen
"The Modern Caveman" <themoder...@mindless.com> wrote in message
news:b7f3d381.0310...@posting.google.com...
The Masked Bishop
expect
writers. <
Yes, this is all true, and acting like it shouldn't be says you need to find
somewhere else to post. I'm sorry, but the departure of Susan Polgar and
Mikahil Golubev is just not breaking my heart. This is a rough bar...the
tenderfoots can go down the road to the teahouse. People wander in here all
the time, post some high-minded (and usually scolding) diatribe on the
characters and topics here, and then start screaming OH MY GOD THE FLAMES
when a few of those characters lance them like a boil. A few stick around to
liberally pour gasoline on the fires they have started, others storm out. If
you think that RCGP should be remade into some kind of courtesy klatch,
allowing issue trolls like Lev Khariton to come on here and expound on
politicial issues that have nothing to do with chess, without being told to
piss off, then you are still in Kansas, Dorothy. Won't happen, moose out
front should have told you.
>What I do say is that we do not have enough players
of GM Golubev's calibre contributing to this group, they should be treated
with greater respect to encourage their participation."<
Utter hogwash. The guy sees mates in five, so he's better than anyone else?
His opinions on chess politics carry more weight? If anything, he should be
roasted even more than most people, because it's GMs like him who hold a big
chunk of culpability for the sorry shape organized chess is in today.
Opportunistic greedbags, who'd play skittles on the freshly-dead corpse of
their mother if Kirzhan guaranteed them a prize fund.
TMB
The Masked Bishop
internet.<
In today's litigious society, I don't think anyone worries about that
anywhere. You bust a nose, you get sued, and end up handing over a large
chunk of your weekly paycheck to the bustee for the next five years. It's
not like the good old days, when men were men, and settled things outside...
EZoto
>GM Susan Polgar has just written that she will no longer write any posts here.
Sad to hear that.
EZoto
Louis Blair
> ... the departure of Susan Polgar and Mikahil
> Golubev is just not breaking my heart. ...
_
The notes of Susan Polgar and Mikahil Golubev did
not seem to me to have much in common.
Nick
> Nick wrote:
> > Evidently, even 'a little consideration' is too much to ask for
> > Abusive writers tend to drive away thoughtful writers....
>
> Yes, this is all true, and acting like it shouldn't be says you need
> to find somewhere else to post.
"If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" is not one of my principles.
> I'm sorry, but the departure of Susan Polgar and Mikahil Golubev is
> just not breaking my heart.
I suspect that some (perhaps many American) readers here may prefer to read
whatever someone such as Stan Booz writes, on any subject of his choice, than
to read whatever GM Susan Polgar or GM Mikhail Golubev might have had to write
about chess.
> This is a rough bar...the tenderfoots can go down the road to the teahouse.
> People wander in here all the time, post some high-minded (and usually
> scolding) diatribe on the characters and topics here, and then start
> screaming OH MY GOD THE FLAMES when a few of those characters lance them like
> a boil. A few stick around to liberally pour gasoline on the fires they have
> started, others storm out. If you think that RCGP should be remade into some
> kind of courtesy klatch, allowing issue trolls like Lev Khariton to come on
> here and expound on politicial issues that have nothing to do with chess,
Yet is it all right for Kasparov to "expound on political issues that have
nothing to do with chess"?
> without being told to piss off, then you are still in Kansas, Dorothy.
Is there a famous wizard in Australia? :-)
> Won't happen, moose out front should have told you.
"We have met the enemy and he is us."
--attributed to 'The Best of Pogo'
> > Simon Spivack ('Chapman billy') wrote (16 April 2003):
> > "What I do say is that we do not have enough players of GM Golubev's
> > calibre contributing to this group, they should be treated with greater
> > respect to encourage their participation."
>
> Utter hogwash. The guy sees mates in five, so he's better than anyone else?
> His opinions on chess politics carry more weight?
"The Masked Bishop" completely snipped what I quoted from Simon Spivack here:
"I am not claiming that any one person's opinion is necessarily more valuable
than another, merely that there are not enough players of IM+ strength posting,
and thus a little consideration may help address this."
I concur with Simon Spivack on this point. Evidently, "The Masked Bishop"
would feel more at home if ('if'?) these chess newsgroups were dominated by
some ignorant trolls who enjoy writing lying personal attacks about as often
as they can.
> If anything, he should be roasted even more than most people, because it's
> GMs like him who hold a big chunk of culpability for the sorry shape
> organized chess is in today. Opportunistic greedbags, who'd play skittles
> on the freshly-dead corpse of their mother if Kirzhan guaranteed them a
> prize fund.
"Because it's GMs like him"? Has "The Masked Bishop" ever met GM Mikhail
Golubev? "Opportunistic greedbags...(snipped offensive generalisation)"?
Evidently, "The Masked Bishop" has not known a sufficiently diverse number
of GMs, which is not to say that most of those GMs would have been pleased
to make the acquaintance of "The Masked Bishop".
'Man is arrogant in proportion to his ignorance.'
--Edward George Earle Bulwer-Lytton (Zanoni)
--Nick
The Masked Bishop
"There he goes, up to his room, to write that hit song 'Alone in my
principles."
From "That Thing You Do." NOT by Bulwer-Lytton.
TMB
John Macnab
in a peaceful, well-mannered fashion. Unfortunately, any place on the
internet is a target for foul-mouthed bullies who would like everyone to
play by *their* rules.
Don't misunderstand: some of the wise-cracks and good-natured flameouts
add considerable pleasure to usenet. It's the motiveless malignancy I
would prefer to do without.
John
The Masked Bishop
would prefer to do without.<
As would we all. But the usenet is not the place for civilized chat.
Anonymity and no costs bring out the worst in people.
TMB
Parrthenon
By Larry Parr
<<I like Susan a lot, but to say she's on the front lines when she hasn't
played a tournament game since 1995 is, well, not accurate.>> -- John Fernandez
Just as John "take my urine, please" Fernandez claimed to be a buddy
and to like GM Alex Sherzer, so he now claims to like GM Susan Polgar a lot.
Ms. Polgar had better never find herself falsely accused of anything
because Mr. Fernandez, as he did with GM Sherzer, will be nipping at her
throat.
That's our kid.
michael adams
>
> "The Masked Bishop" <t...@c4.com> wrote in message
> news:<BWlnb.5530$P%1.45...@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com>...
> > Nick wrote:
> > > Evidently, even 'a little consideration' is too much to ask for
> > > or to expect from too many writers here....
> > > Abusive writers tend to drive away thoughtful writers....
> >
> > Yes, this is all true, and acting like it shouldn't be says you need
> > to find somewhere else to post.
>
> "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" is not one of my principles.
>
> > I'm sorry, but the departure of Susan Polgar and Mikahil Golubev is
> > just not breaking my heart.
>
> I suspect that some (perhaps many American) readers here may prefer to read
> whatever someone such as Stan Booz writes, on any subject of his choice, than
> to read whatever GM Susan Polgar or GM Mikhail Golubev might have had to write
> about chess.
<snip>
Oh! come now Nick, not all the readers are Yankee doodles & I'm sure
they too pick up on StanB's pithy wit. You're simply in a huff because
there aren't any GM's around for you to suck up to & arse-lick..
Martin Wilber
t...@c4.com says...
That is why a good newsreader with features like "ignore thread" and
"bozo bin" comes in handy. If Polgar had something like that, I believe
she would still be here posting.
Marty
Cesar A. K. Grossmann
>
> I concur with Simon Spivack on this point. Evidently, "The Masked Bishop"
> would feel more at home if ('if'?) these chess newsgroups were dominated by
> some ignorant trolls who enjoy writing lying personal attacks about as often
> as they can.
I think it's called "the worst it is, the best".
I, for me, was enjoying the proximity of GM Susan Polgar. Being able to
talk in a public forum with someone that has done so much is a pleasant
experience. Most of the role models cannot be reached so easily, if at
all, and having an oportunity to exchange ideas with one such person is
almost as an unique experience (I don't live at USA or Europe, and have
no hope to meet any of the big boys and girls of today chess).
Seeing such a good person being trashed and bad mouthed by such inferior
form of life (trolls are an inferior form of life in internet - and in
middle earth too), to the point she prefers to left it was a sorry
experience.
I understand the necessity of some people to hate everyone that has DONE
something - it's called "inferiority felling" -, but when it reach the
point that you must ask them "don't you have any decency" you know that
everything is trashed here... The channel is more poor now. Everybody
lost. When trolls and flamewarriors wins, there's no winners...
Sorry the "engrish", and the flame...
--
Cesar A. K. Grossmann
mdamien
news:bnoh2p$13n3ep$1...@ID-210972.news.uni-berlin.de...
<snip>
> I, for me, was enjoying the proximity of GM Susan Polgar. Being able to
> talk in a public forum with someone that has done so much is a pleasant
> experience.
I also appreciated that she posted to the group, and was pleasantly
surprised that she did so. Apparently, I missed most of the nonsense that
drove her away, since I have many posters on my block list.
Matt
EZoto
Maybe John Fernandez is Stan B! Makes sense doesn't it? I'm gonna
miss Susan posting here. I remember Paul Troung from long ago and we
were all on the wild side almost teenagers we were. He's an alright
guy. He's not perfect but he is cool. I know I have posted things I
wish I could have taken back but there are some here who couldn't care
less what they say or who they hurt. I like reading here in this
group but you have to take the good with the bad in here.
EZoto
Nick
message news:<3F9F92...@tinshed.com.au>...
> Nick wrote:
> > "The Masked Bishop" <t...@c4.com> wrote in message
> > news:<BWlnb.5530$P%1.45...@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com>...
> > > Nick wrote:
> > > > Evidently, even 'a little consideration' is too much to ask for
> > > > or to expect from too many writers here....
> > > > Abusive writers tend to drive away thoughtful writers....
> > >
> > > Yes, this is all true, and acting like it shouldn't be says you need
> > > to find somewhere else to post.
> >
> > "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" is not one of my principles.
> >
> > > I'm sorry, but the departure of Susan Polgar and Mikahil Golubev is
> > > just not breaking my heart.
> >
> > I suspect that some (perhaps many American) readers here may prefer to read
> > whatever someone such as Stan Booz writes, on any subject of his choice,
> > than to read whatever GM Susan Polgar or GM Mikhail Golubev might have had
> > to write about chess.
>
> Oh! come now Nick, not all the readers are Yankee doodles & I'm sure they
> too pick up on StanB's pithy wit.
Actually, I have no doubt that some non-American readers (e.g. Michael Adams)
may admire Stan Booz's characteristic vulgarity and occasional racist comments.
> You're simply in a huff because there aren't any GM's around for you
> to suck up to & arse-lick.
On the contrary, I have written some critical comments here with respect to
the extent of GM Susan Polgar's responsibilities for her book, "Queen of the
King's Game", and her negotiating position(s) toward her (never played) past
world championship rematch with GM Xie Jun. Some of my writings here already
have demonstrated that I do not regard any grandmaster (including such popular
idols as Bobby Fischer and Garry Kasparov) as above all possible criticisms.
'Your criticism sounds more sincere than your admiration.'
--George Bernard Shaw (The Irrational Knot)
--Nick
Nick
I would not have attempted to join the NSDAP (Nazi Party)
simply because 'everyone else was doing it'.
My general regard toward the trolls here may be expressed as:
'A fly, Sir, may sting a stately horse and make him wince;
but one is an insect, and the other is a horse still.'
--Samuel Johnson
--Nick
StanB
> >Evidently, even 'a little consideration' is too much to ask for or to
> expect
> from too many writers here. Abusive writers tend to drive away thoughtful
> writers. <
>
> Yes, this is all true, and acting like it shouldn't be says you need to
find
> somewhere else to post. I'm sorry, but the departure of Susan Polgar and
> Mikahil Golubev is just not breaking my heart.
Oh yes. Mikhail Golubev. Wasn't he the joker that said the USA contributed a
small part in the victory over Germany? I guess Stalin's revisionist history
books still exist there. No doubt he thinks we are all in his gratitude for
the USSR B-17s, Red Army Rangers at Omaha beach, and for all those eggs,
Stalin's eggs, they gave to feed us, did to end the war and save freedom.
StanB
Briarroot
And you are the horse's ass.
Parrthenon
By Larry Parr
<<Ms. Polgar had better never find herself falsely accused of anything because
Mr. Fernandez, as he did with GM Sherzer, will be nipping at her throat. That's
our kid.>> -- Larry Parr
<<Both are people who I've interacted very positively with on a personal basis
many times. You, on the other hand, are just some raving lunatic. There's a
difference.>> -- John Fernandez
No, we are not trying to find a title for a Chinese Kung-fu epic. We are
describing the latest exchange between this writer, the raving lunatic, and
John Fernandez, the slithering snake.
John Fernandez spoke of Alex Sherzer as a friend whom he admired, but
when the case began to appear bad for Sherzer, the kid was there with the venom
for his admirable, ah, friend.
Several others also commented on Mr. Fernandez's treatment of his dear,
ah, admirable friend.
Once again, I offer Susan Polgar this advice: The kid says he likes
you a lot. Translation: if you are ever falsely accused of something and you
appear to be struggling in court, then you'll have an admiring, friendly snake
slithering toward you.
That's our kid.
Which kid?
Mr. Fernandez: the one who had those 36 or so insider Olympic
sources -- oh, there might have been 42 on Monday and as few as 30 on some
other day -- but overall, he had about three dozen insider Olympic sources
telling him that chess would not be dropped from the Beijing Olympics the very
day before chess was dropped from the Beijing Olympics!
The kid's a danged plum doozy, all right.
>>And those that know me know that I consider democracy to be complete
bullshit.>> -- John Fernandez
Liam Too
"A Horse, of Course" --Don Blazer
Nick
news:<4rGdnXQub_r...@comcast.com>...
> "The Masked Bishop" <t...@c4.com> wrote in message
> news:BWlnb.5530$P%1.45...@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com...
> > > Evidently, even 'a little consideration' is too much to ask for
> > > Abusive writers tend to drive away thoughtful writers.
> >
> > Yes, this is all true, and acting like it shouldn't be says you need to
> > find somewhere else to post. I'm sorry, but the departure of Susan Polgar
> > and Mikahil Golubev is just not breaking my heart.
>
> Oh yes. Mikhail Golubev. Wasn't he the joker that said the USA contributed
> a small part in the victory over Germany?
"Yes, US played some secondary *important* role in the victory over Hitler."
--GM Mikhail Golubev (17 April 2003)
> I guess Stalin's revisionist history books still exist there.
As far as I know, nearly every (if not every) German general concurred after
1945 that Germany had lost the war *primarily* on its vast front against the
Soviet Union.
For further reading:
"When Titans Clashed: How the Red Army Stopped Hitler"
by David Glantz and Jonathan House (1995, University of Kansas Press)
David Glantz (Colonel (retired), United States Army) is considered the leading
American military historian on the war between Germany and the Soviet Union.
> No doubt he thinks we are all in his gratitude for the USSR B-17s, Red Army
> Rangers at Omaha beach, and for all those eggs, Stalin's eggs, they gave to
> feed us, did to end the war and save freedom.
> StanB
I cannot speak on behalf of GM Mikhail Golubev. But some people outside the
United States do suspect that many, if not most, Americans are ignorantly
convinced that the United States alone deserves all the credit for winning the
Second World War, essentially without any significant support from any allies.
Stan Booz reminds me of the "flag-waving" American (as described by a Russian
acquaintance of mine) who claimed that the United States deserved "full credit"
(yes, that's *full*) for the decisive victory at the Battle of Stalingrad.
I have no doubt that Stan Booz will continue to believe that 'history' must be
always written on sacred stone tablets inscribed with the United States flag.
'Historians are not accountable for the difficulty of learning to read.'
--Jane Austen (Northanger Abbey)
--Nick
Nick
> John Macnab wrote:
> > ...It's the motiveless malignancy I would prefer to do without.
My impression is that some writers may regard maligning other persons as
their primary, if not their only, motive for writing here at all.
> As would we all.
Not quite 'we all'.
If 'all' were true, then we should not need to have this discussion.
> But the usenet is not the place for civilized chat.
> Anonymity and no costs bring out the worst in people.
Or that may bring out something more revealingly characteristic in a person.
Should someone be regarded more as a honest person for not lying when
1) one has been deterred only by the fear of being identified and punished or
2) one has recognised that it's wrong, even when 'safe', to do so?
'This above all: to thine own self be true.'
--William Shakespeare (Hamlet)
--Nick
Nick
message news:<20031029193651...@mb-m01.aol.com>...
> From: nickbo...@yahoo.co.uk (Nick)
> Message-id: <6655d472.03102...@posting.google.com>
> > "The Masked Bishop" <t...@c4.com> wrote in message
> > news:<hSDnb.7776$8x2.4...@newssrv26.news.prodigy.com>...
> > > Nick wrote:
> > > > "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" is not one of my principles.
> > >
> > > "There he goes, up to his room, to write that hit song
> > > 'Alone in my principles."
> > > From "That Thing You Do." NOT by Bulwer-Lytton.
> >
> > I would not have attempted to join the NSDAP (Nazi Party)
> > simply because 'everyone else was doing it'.
>
Mr. Houlsby,
My hypothetical decision not to join the NSDAP (if I had been living in 1930s
Germany) should have demanded hardly any moral courage, only a modicum of
self-respect. Most Germans (including Field Marshal Erwin Rommel, a famous
wartime hero) never formally joined the NSDAP.
Evidently, some Germans who did join the NSDAP were mere opportunists, not
necessarily fanatical anti-Semites. A friend of mine comes from a German
Jewish family (his parents left Germany in 1939), which had been quite
conservative and nationalistic. One of his uncles (a highly observant Jew)
had been decorated for bravery after he lost an arm while fighting in the
First World War; he refused to leave his Vaterland under any circumstances.
Fortunately, on account of his status as a 'war hero' (which even the Nazis
respected to some extent), he was not sent to a concentration camp ('one of
the nicer ones', in my friend's words) until late in the war, and he was able
to survive. Anyhow, my friend's father (an engineer) was very nationalistic,
politically conservative, and fiercely anti-Communist. A few of his non-Jewish
friends joined the NSDAP and actually invited him (the son of a rabbi) to
attempt to join it too! According to my friend, if it had not been for the
immutable facts that his father was Jewish and the Nazis were anti-Semitic,
then his father would have seriously considered joining the NSDAP. At that
time, of course, he did not expect the realities of the future Holocaust.
My friend's point was that his father was able to coexist in comparative peace
for some time with some friends or acquaintances who had joined the NSDAP.
> I'm not sure that I would have had the chutzpah of a Bielenberg or a
> Bonhoffer if I had found myself in such difficult historical circumstances.
After the failure of the plot to assassinate Hitler on 20 July 1944,
Adam von Trott zu Solz (a diplomat) was arrested and tortured by the Nazis.
Peter Bielenberg (a close friend of Trott) devised a daring plan for Trott's
escape, but that plan was betrayed, and Bielenberg was sent to a concentration
camp. His British wife, Christabel (nee Burton), was able to meet a prominent
Nazi late in the war. Then she implied, carefully but clearly, that the war
would end soon, and that then a once prominent Nazi would need any friend that
he could find among the victorious Allies. She mentioned that her family was
well-connected in the United Kingdom, and if anything more unpleasant were to
happen to her husband, then she would later do her utmost to make that Nazi
personally regret the consequences. Adam von Trott zu Solz was executed,
but Peter Bielenberg was able to survive. After the war, the Bielenbergs
decided to settle in Ireland.
> 'Certain good qualities are like the senses: people entirely lacking in
> them can neither perceive nor comprehend them.'
> --La Rochefoucauld (Maxims, 1665)
--Nick
The Masked Bishop
through the Oxford Book of Quotations, but why don't you just speak for
yourself, and let poor old Jane Austen alone?
TMB
Liam Too
Nick, believe me, Mark's "I Know, Interesting, I know" comment was
more interesting than the following response:
"In 1919 Anton Drexler, Gottfried Feder and Dietrich Eckart formed the
German Worker's Party (GPW) in Munich. The German Army was worried
that it was a left-wing revolutionary group and sent Adolf Hitler, one
of its education officers, to spy on the organization. Hitler
discovered that the party's political ideas were similar to his own.
He approved of Drexler's German nationalism and anti-Semitism but was
unimpressed with the way the party was organized. Although there as a
spy, Hitler could not restrain himself when a member made a point he
disagreed with, and he stood up and made a passionate speech on the
subject.
Anton Drexler was impressed with Hitler's abilities as an orator and
invited him to join the party. At first Hitler was reluctant, but
urged on by his commanding officer, Captain Karl Mayr, he eventually
agreed. He was only the fifty-fourth person to join the German
Worker's Party. Hitler was immediately asked to join the executive
committee and was later appointed the party's propaganda manager.
In the next few weeks Hitler brought several members of his army into
the party, including one of his commanding officers, Captain Ernst
Roehm. The arrival of Roehm was an important development as he had
access to the army political fund and was able to transfer some of the
money into the GWP.
The German Worker's Party used some of this money to advertise their
meetings. Adolf Hitler was often the main speaker and it was during
this period that he developed the techniques that made him into such a
persuasive orator.
Hitler's reputation as an orator grew and it soon became clear that he
was the main reason why people were joining the party. This gave
Hitler tremendous power within the organization as they knew they
could not afford to lose him.
In April, 1920, Hitler advocated that the party should change its name
to the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP). Hitler had
always been hostile to socialist ideas, especially those that involved
racial or sexual equality. However, socialism was a popular political
philosophy in Germany after the First World War. This was reflected in
the growth in the German Social Democrat Party (SDP), the largest
political party in Germany.
Hitler, therefore redefined socialism by placing the word 'National'
before it. He claimed he was only in favour of equality for those who
had "German blood". Jews and other "aliens" would lose their rights of
citizenship, and immigration of non-Germans should be brought to an
end.
In February 1920, the NSDAP published its first programme which became
known as the "Twenty-Five Points". In the programme the party refused
to accept the terms of the Versailles Treaty and called for the
reunification of all German people. To reinforce their ideas on
nationalism, equal rights were only to be given to German citizens.
"Foreigners" and "aliens" would be denied these rights.
To appeal to the working class and socialists, the programme included
several measures that would redistribute income and war profits,
profit-sharing in large industries, nationalization of trusts,
increases in old-age pensions and free education.
On 24th February, 1920, the NSDAP (later nicknamed the Nazi Party)
held a mass rally where it announced its new programme. The rally was
attended by over 2,000 people, a great improvement on the 25 people
who were at Hitler's first party meeting."
It would be deemed boring by the multitudes of chessplayers, who are
lurking in these forums in their clamor to further quench their
thirsts in the learning of their game.
Lance Smith
Nick
> Hey Nick, I'm sure we're all mightily impressed by your ability to flip
> through the Oxford Book of Quotations, but why don't you just speak for
> yourself, and let poor old Jane Austen alone?
Before doing more of his ignorant trolling here, "The Masked Bishop" could
actually check 'The Oxford Book of Quotations' (sic), which I did not use,
for the presence of my specific quotation from Jane Austen that evidently he
has (mis)attributed to it. I doubt that he should be able to find it there.
'She was heartily ashamed of her ignorance--a misplaced shame. Where people
wish to attach, they should always be ignorant. To come with a well-informed
mind is to come with an inability of administering to the vanity of others,
which a sensible person would always wish to avoid. A woman, especially, if
she have the misfortune of knowing anything, should conceal it as well as she
can.'
Nick
> From: One Eyed Jack no...@never.mil
> Message-id: <d0oob.1700$In4.1...@monger.newsread.com>
> > one cannot defend opportunistic nazis {by calling them 'mere' or lesser}.
> > behavior is ultimately a measure of effect. whether some German of some
> > generations ago killed Jews because he hated them or becuase he wanted
> > to get a better job, he is still in effect an anti-semite and a jew killer.
> > if anything, authentic jew-haters are probably more moral if not far
> > more misguided than the former because the jew-haters were less aware of
> > their crimes-- crimes not just against jews but against human decency.
> > this sort of moral equivocation is akin to over-cooked pooridge.
>
> I cannot speak for him, yet I suspect that Mr. Bourbaki, to whom, I further
> suspect, your vituperative rhetoric was intended to be directed (since all
> I wrote was "I know" and "Interesting") was already aware of the points that
> you raise, above.
Mr. Houlsby,
Perhaps "One Eyed Jack" has read "Hitler's Willing Executioners" by Daniel
Goldhagen, which seems to be a popular book in the United States but one with
hardly any credibility among academic historians of that subject, and he
believes that every word of it must be literally true? I am well aware of
many oversimplifications and distortions among the popular presentations
(e.g. 'television documentaries') of that tragic period in history. Indeed,
the popular appeal among the ignorant of "Hitler's Willing Executioners" could
be substantially explained by Goldhagen's relentless oversimplifications,
not to mention his many factual distortions.
"The fundamental problem for our understanding of science under National
Socialism is the persistent and virulent use of the Janus-like combination
of hagiography and demonization, the black-and-white characterisation of
scientists--like other professions and social groups--as fitting into three
mutually exclusive categories: 'Nazi'; 'anti-Nazi'; or neither one nor the
other. One could also label these categories 'Heaven', 'Hell', and 'Purgatory',
for they are based on the timeless, if sometimes simplistic theme of the
struggle between good and evil.
A spectrum of 'shades of gray' is far more useful than the black-and-white
model for studying science and scientists under Hitler. Although the two
ends of this spectrum can also be thought of as 'Nazi' and 'anti-Nazi', these
extremes are usually not reached, only approached. Almost every individual
or institution in Germany embodied some elements that were either 'Nazi',
'anti-Nazi', or neither."
--Mark Walker (Nazi Science: Myth, Truth, and the German Atomic Bomb, p. 2)
> Yet further, I suspect that he most probably concurs, at least in large
> measure, with those same points. I seriously doubt that his intent was
> to "defend opportunistic nazis" (sic).
In my original post, I mentioned a friend of mine whose German Jewish parents
were compelled to leave their beloved Vaterland in 1939 and whose uncle was
sent to a Nazi concentration camp. In an earlier post, I have mentioned a late
Israeli scholar, whom I knew and admired greatly, who was a survivor of the
Belsen concentration camp. Only someone who does not know me at all would have
ignorantly concluded that I was attempting to "defend opportunistic nazis".
'Went the day well?
We died and never knew.
But, well or ill,
Freedom, we died for you.'
--John Maxwell Edmonds (1918)
--Nick
The Masked Bishop
all of your fusty antiquarian delving, is that one tires rapidly of seeing
literary quotes in usenet posts. You are not impressing anyone, and should
we wish an education in the humanities, here is not the place to find it.
Stick to Judit Polgar, and forget trading boring, middlebrow comments about
pop history with mhoulsby. You will be HAPPIER for it.
TMB, no more an ignorant troll than you, bucko.
Nick
> Yes, yes, Nick, whatever. The point, which you seemed to have missed despite
> all of your fusty antiquarian delving, is that one tires rapidly of seeing
> literary quotes in usenet posts. You are not impressing anyone, and should
> we wish an education in the humanities, here is not the place to find it.
> Stick to Judit Polgar, and forget trading boring, middlebrow comments about
> pop history with mhoulsby. You will be HAPPIER for it.
"Unfortunately, any place on the internet is a target for foul-mouthed bullies
who would like everyone to play by *their* rules."
--John Macnab
Evidently, I have overlooked the general announcement that has proclaimed
that "The Masked Bishop" must be the supreme arbiter of what may or may not
be written here. I could not care less about what "The Masked Bishop" might
think of my writings, and I could not care less about whether or not he chooses
to read them. Also, "The Masked Bishop"'s implied claim that he must represent
every other reader here (not to mention his ad hominem fantasies about me)
warrants no response from me beyond disdain.
> TMB, no more an ignorant troll than you, bucko.
I can understand why "The Masked Bishop" might well prefer to have his
evidently blissful ignorance left undisturbed.
Jack : I know nothing, Lady Bracknell.
Lady Bracknell: I am pleased to hear it. I do not approve of anything that
tampers with natural ignorance. Ignorance is like an exotic
fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone. The whole theory of
modern education is radically unsound. Fortunately in England,
at any rate, education produces no effect whatsoever. If it
did, it would prove a serious danger to the upper classes,
and probably lead to acts of violence in Grosvenor Square.
--Oscar Wilde (The Importance of Being Earnest)
--Nick
Nick
> Yes, yes, Nick, whatever. The point, which you seemed to have missed despite
> all of your fusty antiquarian delving, is that one tires rapidly of seeing
> literary quotes in usenet posts. You are not impressing anyone, and should
> we wish an education in the humanities, here is not the place to find it.
> Stick to Judit Polgar, and forget trading boring, middlebrow comments about
> pop history with mhoulsby. You will be HAPPIER for it.
"Unfortunately, any place on the internet is a target for foul-mouthed bullies
who would like everyone to play by *their* rules."
--John Macnab
Evidently, I have overlooked the general announcement that has proclaimed
that "The Masked Bishop" must be the supreme arbiter of what may or may not
be written here. I could not care less about what "The Masked Bishop" might
think of my writings, and I could not care less about whether or not he chooses
to read them. Also, "The Masked Bishop"'s implied claim that he must represent
every other reader here (not to mention his ad hominem fantasies about me)
warrants no response from me beyond disdain.
> TMB, no more an ignorant troll than you, bucko.
I can understand why "The Masked Bishop" might well prefer to have his
The Masked Bishop
that "The Masked Bishop" must be the supreme arbiter of what may or may not
be written here. <
"Nick," I don't know you could have missed that.
> I could not care less about what "The Masked Bishop" might
think of my writings,<
They are not your writings. They are wholesale lifts from other writers.
> Also, "The Masked Bishop"'s implied claim that he must represent
every other reader here (not to mention his ad hominem fantasies about me)
warrants no response from me beyond disdain.<
Still, you managed to double-post a lengthy responses, complete with more
ponderous lifts from more 19th century classics. Your disdain is coming off
more like a serving of scones, "Nick." Sorry the local academy isn't hiring
literature teachers this year.
TMB
michael adams
Hehe, it's the word 'warrant' that Nickleodeon & Markieboy are so fond
of using, could be a Novacastrian thang I suppose, anyway I'm hereby
warranting the Masked Bishop, with regard to 'Nick', to speak on my
behalf any day of the week..
"Life is too important to be taken seriously" (O. Wylde)