Truong is Fake Sloan, Jackass Lafferty & Fake Ray Gordon

50 views
Skip to first unread message

OdessaChess

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 8:21:02 AM9/26/07
to
News Flash! Paul Truong Illustrates New Professionalism for USCF Board
Members!

Volunteer USCF IT guy Brian Mothershead has definitive proof that Paul
Truong has been posting (more than 5000 posts) as the fake Sam Sloan and Ray
Gordon and has more recently posted as Jackass Lafferty. Mr. Truong has
used these fake identifications to launch numerous personal attacks of a
scurrilous nature.

What can the USCF do to rid itself of this unethical man? The Ethics Board
is probably powerless even if it had the backbone to stand up to him. A
recall petition? Too many scholastic nebbishes who will keep their heads in
the sand to feather their own nests.

Maybe Sam Sloan, Brian Lafferty or Ray Gordon will sue Truong for defamation
in the courts of New York or Texas.


samsloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 8:29:45 AM9/26/07
to

I happen to believe this to be true and I am wondering what can be
done about it.

The Real Sam Sloan

OdessaChess

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 8:38:10 AM9/26/07
to
by Brian Mottershead on Wed Sep 26, 2007 6:02 am #71050

I am going now to give a general characterization of the information that is
is the main.uschess.org logs. Later today, I hope I will receive permission
to post the actual lines from the logs for the inspection of concerned USCF
members.

I already presented two posts that were made on the rec.games.chess.politics
newsgroup, both posted by the "Fake Ray Gordon". One of these had the IP
address 75.111.194.9, a Suddenlink cable IP address from Texas. This post is
one of six that were made by FRG on September 19. The other post was one
made from 201.134.236.150 yesterday. This is an IP address in Mexico City.

Now, this web site keeps both regular web logs and a log that is maintained
by the joomla-bridge for this forum. The regular web logs record the
date/time, IP address, the request, including query string, and the user
agent string that was sent by the browser for every hit on the web server.
The joomla-bridge log keeps all of this information, plus it gives the
Joomla user id, and the Joomla and phpbb3 usernames of the user for each hit
on the forums.

Starting on September 16, a particular user was logged in on the forums and
made numerous requests on the forum software with the IP address
75.111.194.9. This continued until September 20. During this time, with one
short exception every hit by this user, at least when logged in under his
account, was from this IP address. The exception was a short visit to the
forums when the person accessed the forums from an IP address associated
with university in Texas. After the short interruption he went back to
75.111.194.9. It was during this period that all the posts in the forum with
a poster IP of 75.111.194.9 occurred. September 19, which is when the 6 FRG
posts from 75.111.194.9 were made in the newsgroup, fell toward the end of
this period.

Later, on September 20, the person stopped using 75.111.194.9, and appeared
briefly with another IP, from a cell phone company. Then, still later on
September 20, the person started using 201.134.236.150, which is an IP
address in Mexico City. Though the person had stopped posting in the forums
by then, he still needed to be logged into the forums in order to read the
USCF Issues forum and to check PM's. All those accesses, of which there were
many, were from 201.134.236.150. The usage of 201.134.236.150 continued
through last night throughout the night. It looks like the person was up all
night monitoring this forum. During the night, he was apparently also busy
deleting large numbers of FRG and FSS posts from the usenet groups. It was
this Mexico City IP, 201.134.236.150, which was used to post the second of
the two posts I presented last night, the one that referred to me and Bogner
as "crooks" and speculated as to whether we were stealing credit card
numbers from USCF members.

So, not only do the IP addresses on posts in the forums tie these two IP
addresses associated with FRG to the forum member, but the logs show that a
specific forum member was using these two IP addresses essentially
continuously on this forum, with the exception of the short visit from the
university.

There is also evidence from the User Agent strings. User agent strings are
information sent by web browsers to servers to describe themselves, so that
the servers know what kind of browser it is, and can generate the
appropriate HTML. Different browsers occasionally require different HTML
code. Essentially all of the thousands of posts made during the last several
months by FRG and FSS have had the same user agent string as the September
19 Usenet post that I posted. This was:

Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0; AOL 9.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR
2.0.50727; Media Center PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506;
InfoPath.2),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)

This is a quite specific user agent string, and in the logs for the forums,
there have been only two users with this user agent string since the
joomla-bridge logs started to be kept on September 14. One of those two
users accessed the forums rarely in the period, and by looking at
timestamps, it is possible to eliminate that person as a possibility, even
without considering IP addresses. The other user with this user agent string
was the same person who was coming into this forum from 75.111.194.9 and who
posted here under that IP. I repeat that this is the IP from which FRG made
6 posts to the Usenet groups on September 19.

Next, you will note that the user agent string is different on the Usenet
post by FRG yesterday from Mexico City. This was: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible;
MSIE 7.0; AOL 9.0; Windows NT 6.0; SLCC1; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; Media Center
PC 5.0; .NET CLR 3.0.04506; Tablet PC 2.0),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)

This second string is similar to the first, but it is a Tablet PC 2.0.
Apparently, FRG took his laptop with him from Texas to Mexico City, not his
desktop system. Significantly, when the forum user who had been posting and
visiting under 75.111.194.9 suddenly appeared on the forum with the same
Mexico City IP as FRG used, he also had the same Tablet PC 2.0 user agent
string as well. Every hit on this forum from Mexico City has had that user
agent string, the same one as appeared on the FRG post yesterday.

So both the IP addresses and the user agent strings used by the particular
person on this forum match those used by FRG for the September 19 and
September 26 posts, and one of the user agent strings matches the one that
FRG, FSS, etc have been recording on Usenet for many months.


samsloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 10:24:52 AM9/26/07
to
Brian Mottershead on Wed Sep 26, 2007 7:02 am #71050

samsloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 10:45:49 AM9/26/07
to
y Brian Mottershead on Wed Sep 26, 2007 8:55 am #71071

sdo1 wrote:Perhaps you caught someone with their "hand in the
cookie jar." So what? It is such a petty thing. And for that you have
destroyed so much.

This is the crux of your comment. Anybody who can characterize the
nearly 5000 posts from Fake Sam Sloan/Fake Ray Gordon as petty either
has not read any of the posts or has a very different concept of petty
than I do.

Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot"

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 1:38:29 PM9/26/07
to
I would need to see scans of the evidence and talk to the source before I'd
take something like this seriously.


--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru
http://www.cybersheet.com/seduction.html
Limit of TEN students. Act now!

For older free material that is now mainstream:
http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
have been rendered worthless through mainstream media exposure. It really
is game over for community material.

http://moderncaveman.typepad.com
The Official Ray Gordon Blog


samsloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 2:32:38 PM9/26/07
to
On Sep 26, 1:38 pm, "Ray Gordon, creator of the \"pivot\""

<r...@cybersheet.com> wrote:
> I would need to see scans of the evidence and talk to the source before I'd
> take something like this seriously.
>
> --
> Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guruhttp://www.cybersheet.com/seduction.html

The evidence is clear and beyond reasonable doubt.

The Fake Sam Sloan and the Fake Ray Gordon have been posting from a
computer at Texas Tech University during the time that they were at
that university.

Then, when Polgar and Truong went to Mexico City for the World Chess
Championship last week, the Fake Sam Sloan and the Fake Ray Gordon
started posting from Mexico City.

All night last night, the Fake Sam Sloan and the Fake Ray Gordon was
up all night cancelling his postings. That is why today you can no
longer find the postings here.

The evidence is conclusive that Paul Truong and Susan Polgar, husband
and wife, have been impersonating the Fake Sam Sloan and the Fake Ray
Gordon.

The Real Sam Sloan

kr...@citgo.com

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 2:47:02 PM9/26/07
to
Hmmm I would almost advise Sam and Ray to sue for defamation but then
it is Sam and Ray we are talking about ...

Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot"

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 2:48:58 PM9/26/07
to
> Hmmm I would almost advise Sam and Ray to sue for defamation but then
> it is Sam and Ray we are talking about ...

Like I said, I would need to see the evidence.

If you guys are serious, send it to me.


--

Mike Murray

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 3:08:34 PM9/26/07
to
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:32:38 -0700, samsloan <samh...@gmail.com>
wrote:


>All night last night, the Fake Sam Sloan and the Fake Ray Gordon was
>up all night cancelling his postings. That is why today you can no
>longer find the postings here.

Because I read the rgc* with Forte Agent , the content of posts which
I read are kept locally on my machine. I've got most of 'em going
back several years. Interesting reading.

I don't think all UseNet servers honor "deletes", and many of the
posts are regularly copied to non UseNet locations, designed to be
accessed via a browser.

Hard to cover all your footprints.

samsloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 3:37:13 PM9/26/07
to
On Sep 26, 3:08 pm, Mike Murray <mikemur...@despammed.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:32:38 -0700, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com>

Good to know. I have Free Agent as a backup but on mine, which I
brought up do date just now, it erased the old and deleted postings.

So, please keep yours because he may need them.

I have been told that the Fake Sam Sloan has posted a total of 3000
times.

The Real Sam Sloan

Mike Murray

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 4:02:47 PM9/26/07
to
On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:37:13 -0700, samsloan <samh...@gmail.com>
wrote:


>Good to know. I have Free Agent as a backup but on mine, which I
>brought up do date just now, it erased the old and deleted postings.

There are various ways you can tell Agent to purge or clean up the
groups. I just haven't done that with the chess groups. There are no
binaries and the posts are usually pretty short.

>So, please keep yours because he may need them.

I'm not sure they'd work as evidence -- since the repository is local,
it could be argued that I manipulated it.

B. Lafferty

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 5:35:54 PM9/26/07
to

"Mike Murray" <mikem...@despammed.com> wrote in message
news:s0elf3l7ifpune1q1...@4ax.com...

You would be called to testify and lay a foundation for the introduction of
what you have into evidence. The on cross they'll try to show you
manipulated it. It comes down to your credibility. Not to worry.

There are indeed many places that store posts forever. If anything, trying
to cover footprints will come back to haunt him as evidence of guilt.


Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot"

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 5:51:19 PM9/26/07
to

> There are indeed many places that store posts forever. If anything,
> trying
> to cover footprints will come back to haunt him as evidence of guilt.

I wish you guys had found this stuff three weeks ago, since I wouldn't have
to start over again.

On the other hand, I can still go to state court.


--

marcusw...@gmail.com

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 6:22:38 PM9/26/07
to

You are going to need some expert witnesses, and Troung will have an
army of people to *LIE* as experts for him. There was a case
in the UK of a hacker, and he convinced the jury that it wasn't him. I
am afraid that in a criminal and civil sense, you are going to have a
difficult
time to prove this.

Since Sam Sloan was a member of the Executive Board, this is not news.
Nobody cares. In fact, the public now expect this.

I don't know how you are going to find the resources to prove it was
Troung, and you risk the countersuit by Troung.

I'll withold judgement, so I can testify as an expert witness.

Marcus Roberts

Marcus Roberts

Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot"

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 6:47:32 PM9/26/07
to
> You are going to need some expert witnesses,

Nope.

samsloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 7:18:33 PM9/26/07
to
SLJones on Wed Sep 26, 2007 12:20 pm #71120
It seems to me that the deleted thread raised extremely important
issues for the USCF. Everything from election fraud, identify theft,
liable, and slander was involved in the thread. I personally was a
minor target of some of the fraudulent posts.

Now, the USCF has doubled its problems by deleting the entire thread.
I cannot help but agree with those who protest coverup. This is an
issue which the moderators should not and cannot bury under the table.
This is an issue for which they must stand back and let the chips fall
where they may.

Moderators, if it is not your intent to bury these ideas and hide them
from the membership, what is your intent? What are you doing now about
the matters raised in the thread other than pure censorship? Do you
believe that the members of the USCF should not receive this
information? Why not?

Wasn't it Patrick Henry who said, "Sir, I disagree with everything you
say, but I would fight to the death for your right to say it."

Stephen Jones

samsloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 7:27:59 PM9/26/07
to
[quote="DACP"][quote="tsawmiller"]Doesn't anyone who claims to have
saved the thread in question have Mr. Goichberg's response?
As I recall, he denied authorizing Mr. Mottershead's actions.
Funny no one has mentioned that. Is it because it's inconvenient to
post something that defends the President of USCF?[/quote]

Actually, I believe you would have access to the post since the thread
was pulled and should be in the review area.

However, you wouldn't be able to post it anyways because you just
informed me that reposting items from a pulled thread is a violation
of the AUG.

As far as actually having a copy of the post, no I don't...it must
have been made after 3:25 a.m. I was still reading posts until close
to 4:30 a.m. and do remember seeing it, but had stopped copying them
because I was involved in email and other discussions and then just
couldn't stay awake any longer...

Perhaps, Mr. Goichberg would consider rewording his post and putting
it back into this thread.[/quote]

I think Mr. Goichberg could be in a bit of trouble himself now.

For the past more than one year he has been covering up for, hiding
and protecting the Fake Sam Sloan. Otherwise, the identity of the Fake
Sam Sloan would have been established a year ago.

I would certainly advise him to order the restoration of all the
pulled posts. Otherwise, he will likely be deemed part of the
conspiracy.

I also advise Mr. Vaughn and Mr. Sawmiller to get out of the way and
allow this to unfold. Otherwise, you may be in deeper trouble that you
can imagine.

Sam Sloan

nos...@nospam.com

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 7:41:02 PM9/26/07
to


Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot" wrote:

[snip]

And your reason for refusing to sign your posts with GPG is...?

The usual reason is that the "imposter" is really the non-imposter
pretending to be an imposter.


nos...@nospam.com

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 7:45:38 PM9/26/07
to

samsloan wrote:

>I happen to believe this to be true and I am wondering what can be
>done about it.

Sign your posts with Gnu Privacy Guard, you pathetic moron.

Then you cannot be impersonated.


The Historian

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 10:40:36 PM9/26/07
to
On Sep 26, 6:18 pm, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Wasn't it Patrick Henry who said, "Sir, I disagree with everything you
> say, but I would fight to the death for your right to say it."

I've seen it attributed to Voltaire. And I'm sure somewhere or other
Innes has attributed it to Orwell.


The Historian

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 10:45:42 PM9/26/07
to
On Sep 26, 2:08 pm, Mike Murray <mikemur...@despammed.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Sep 2007 11:32:38 -0700, samsloan <samhsl...@gmail.com>

Hmm, remember "Bob Bennett", the clueless Polgar defender of a couple
of years ago? Popular opinion was that he was Truong. Any way that
could be confirmed or disproved?

The Historian

unread,
Sep 27, 2007, 5:04:14 AM9/27/07
to
On Sep 26, 7:21 am, "OdessaChess" <OdessaCh...@russia.com> wrote:

How soon they forget. Meet John Dough, from August 2003:

Bob,

Here is an email that I received from another person. His post is more
detailed than the proof that I had provided. I reprint this with his
permission:

Over the past few days, I followed the discussion between John Dough
and Bob Bennett quite anxiously because I wanted to know the answer to
the question asked - Are Paul Truong and Bob Bennett the same person?

I had the pleasure of meeting Paul Truong in Nashville earlier this
year. We chatted a bit about scholastic chess and he seemed like a
nice guy. I even had my picture taken with him and Susan Polgar. So
when I read that he was the new Director of Marketing and Public
Relations for the USCF, I thought that he could the one that finally
turns the USCF around. It was a very noble gesture for him to
volunteer for position. You couldn't pay me enough to deal with the
crap at the USCF.

But Bob Bennett is a completely different story. He is an obnoxious,
immature, vulgar, know-it-all that seems to take great pleasure in
lashing out at those who disagree with him. His recent victims include
Hanke, Fernandez, Hahn, Friedman, Paschall, Yermolinsky and now John
Dough. Rather than debate the facts presented, he just insults people.

I spent the past few hours comparing the r.g.c.p. posts of both Paul
Truong and Bob Bennett. What I discovered, to my disappointment, is
that the preponderance amount of evidence leads me to believe that
Paul Truong and Bob Bennett are the same person! Which leads me to the
next question, which I do not have an answer to - Who is the real Paul
Truong?

Here is the evidence that I collected which lead me to reach this
conclusion. Please feel free to draw your own conclusion.

#1) Although Bob Bennett uses AOL to connect to the Internet, he
attempts to hide his identity by using a generic email address from a
free email provider. All of the other AOL users who post on r.g.c.p.,
including JimEade, Rhaas, ASCAChess, JFernandez71, Drahmiel, Miriling,
LeModernCaveman and Recmate, do not go through this much trouble to
hide who they are. Why didn't he just create a new AOL screen name to
hide his identity? My guess is that he is trying to hide the fact that
he uses AOL. It didn't work.

#2) All of the other AOL users who post on r.g.c.p, including those
listed above, use AOL's newsgroup system to post, except for Paul
Truong and Bob Bennett. They both use Google to access the newsgroups.
I could understand why Bob Bennett wouldn't, since AOL wouldn't let
him hide who he is. But I don't understand why Paul would, considering
that Google's newsgroups postings are often delayed 3-12 hours. This
is quite a coincidence.

#3) Because Paul Truong and Bob Bennett use Google, the IP address of
the AOL dialup bank that they connect to is stored in the header of
the postings. Paul Truong and Bob Bennett always seem to be in the
same place, at the same time, even when those places can be as far
apart as New York City and Los Angeles! In one of his most recent
postings, Bob Bennett said that he lives `a few states away from`
California and has no reason to go to the US Open. So unless Bob has
been calling long distance to Los Angeles to dial in, there is no way
he could have the same IP!

FROM LOS ANGELES, DURING THE US OPEN

From: Paultru...@aol.com (Paul Truong)
Subject: Re: The new EB is moving quickly with decisions
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.81.26.103 <---- cache-ntc-ad02.proxy.aol.com

From: ch...@japan.com (Bob Bennett)
Subject: Re: Paul Truong - Background Interview
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.81.26.103 <---- cache-ntc-ad02.proxy.aol.com

FROM NEW YORK CITY, DURING THE SUMMER

From: Paultru...@aol.com (Paul Truong)
Subject: Re: Susan Polgar, let's see some analysis!
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.163.252.163 <-- cache-rh03.proxy.aol.com

From: ch...@japan.com (Bob Bennett)
Subject: Re: Susan Polgar- USCF Grandmaster of the Year
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
NNTP-Posting-Host: 152.163.252.163 <-- cache-rh03.proxy.aol.com

#4) Bob Bennett rarely posts to rec.games.chess.politics, but when he
does, it is always to praise/defend Susan Polgar and Paul Truong. He
was the only person that defended Susan Polgar when she was named the
2003 USCF Grandmaster of the Year. He defended Susan Polgar regarding
her questionable use of the title `World Champion` in Chess Life . He
defended Paul Truong's decision to exclude the 2003 US Women's
Champion Anna Hahn from the US Women's Olympiad team. He defended Paul
Truong's decision regarding WGM Elena Donaldson and the US Women's
Olympiad team. It's an amazing coincidence that he and Paul have the
same opinion on everything.

#5) He claims that he never met Paul Truong but seems to know very
intimate details about Susan Polgar, including details about her
divorce and her financial situation. In his posting on 2/18/2003, he
implies that he does know Susan. So how can he know Susan without
having met Paul? Anyone who has even been to a tournament with Susan
Polgar present knows that Paul Truong hovers over her like a hawk. It
is impossible to meet Susan without meeting Paul. As a matter of fact,
I met Paul because I was trying to meet Susan!

#6) Are we supposed to believe that Bob Bennett, a self-described `red
neck American` that doesn't consider `chess to be a passion` and `is a
successful restaurant owner` who `owns a chain of 16 restaurants in
the tri-state area` while `living a few states from California` would
know the following things:

"WGM Elena Donaldson didn't get along with the 2002 US Women's
Olympiad Team Captain Ilya Gurevich."

"Susan Polgar could have made 20-30x the money to play for the
Hungarian Olympiad Team, instead of the US Team."

"WGM Dembo is a member of the Hungarian Women's Olympiad Team."

"That Susan Polgar brought in Gary Kasparov and OTHER World Class
Grandmasters to train the US Women's Olympiad Team."

"That Susan Polgar and Frederic Friedel (of ChessBase) have been
friends for 20 years"

"That Goletiani moved to the United States in 2000"

"That Susan Polgar's husband was both mentally and emotionally abusive
towards her for years"

"That Susan was very unhappy with her first book and it was one of the
reasons she divorced her husband"

"According to FIDE rules, the minimum prize funds for the women's
world championship are $200,000."

"The Grandmaster of the Year award is awarded to GMs who promote chess
in America, and not those that play it."

"Anna Hahn's friend's attacked the squad, the sponsors and the USCF in
an effort to get her a spot on the Women's Olympiad Team"

#7) Judge for yourself by looking at actual quotes from Bob Bennett's
postings to r.g.c.p. I cite the date and subject of the postings if
you wish to verify their authenticity. Please pay particular attention
to the details and facts he cites. I can't imagine there is anyone who
could know this level of details about Susan Polgar, Olympiad Team
guidelines, Eligibility rules, Polgar vs. FIDE and Grandmaster of the
Year other than Paul Truong, who is Susan's agent/business manager and
the Women's Olympiad Team's Captain, Business Manager and Training
Coordinator.

--------------

IN REGARDS TO BEATRIZ MARINELLO, NEWLY ELECTED USCF PRESIDENT

2nd Lowest Rating - On the border! - "too much scholastic, too one
dimensional"
Bob Bennet - "Best Candidates - Comments" - June 12, 2003

----------------------

IN REGARDS TO TIM HANKE, NEWLY ELECTED USCF VICE PRESIDENT OF FINANCE

"Lowest Rating - No no no no way! - 'too radical, too negative'"
Bob Bennet - "Best Candidates - Comments" - June 12, 2003

"Mr. Tim Hanke, That clearly means that you have not been following US
chess and therefore you are not qualified to run for a board seat."
Bob Bennett - Yes!!!! Susan Polgar -- USCF GM of the year!!! -
06/05/2003

----------------------

IN REGARDS TO THE PAUL TRUONG

"USCF is lucky to have someone like that (Paul Truong) help them."
Bob Bennett - "Re: Paul Truong - Background Interview" - 8/13/2003

"I have never met Truong. He just seems to be a very mannerly person.
I cannot attack mannerly people."
Bob Bennett - "New Boards 2nd Mistake" - 8/14/2003

----------------------

IN REGARDS TO THE US WOMEN'S OLYMPIAD:

"Anna Hahn should be crowned as the US Women's Blitz Chess Champion
not US Women's Chess Champion. The two types of chess have nothing to
do with each other. Shahade and Krush clearly were superior to Anna."
Bob Bennet - Re: Is Anna Hahn Eligible to play in the next US
Championship - 4/13/2003

"The 2004 US Women's Olympiad training squad was selected purely by
ratings. After the team have been training together for months, Anna
Hahn's friends used their positions to push the sponsors to give her a
spot. Her friends attacked the squad, the sponsors and USCF along the
way. "
Bob Bennett - "Should Anna Hahn do it?" - 4/13/2003

"Finally, they include her. Should Anna Hahn, as the US Women's
Champion humiliate herself knowing that there are so many conflicts
and bitterness between her and others? Should she degrade and
embarrass herself by attend this session knowing that she only got the
invitation because her friends bully everybody?"
Bob Bennett - "Should Anna Hahn do it?" - 4/13/2003

"When her rating is 2400 or when she wins another few major
tournament, then I would consider putting her in the same level.
Getting lucky in 1 Swiss tournament does not put you in the same
level. "
Bob Bennett - "Re: Is it equal?" - 4/6/2003

"Does anyone really consider Anna Hahn the same caliber player as
Irina Krush, Jenn Shahade, Elena Donaldson, etc.?"
Bob Bennett - "Is it equal?" - 4/6/2003

"In the Olympiad, the Captain has the right to have his/her own
strategy and he/she can tell each player to go for the win or draw. "
Bob Bennett - "Sam's point about the Russian Women's Team in 1988" -
4/3/2003

"Another fact is she (WGM Elena Donaldson) did not get along with her
captain Ilya Gurevich while all the other members did."
Bob Bennett - "Elena Akhmilovskaya Donaldson at the 1988 World Chess
Olympiad" - 4/3/2003

"Now the USCF is lucky enough to finally have somebody like Polgar,
Kasparov and Truong helping them, everyone should be thankful that US
team has a chance to do something special."
Bob Bennett - "US Women's Team Democratic Player Selection??" -
3/30/2003

"Both Polgar (1994-2003) and Goletiani (2000-2003) qualify under 2 or
3 year rule. And Goletiani was not allowed to play under the old rule
so she lost 3 years as a Junior player (18-21)."
Bob Bennett - "John Fernandez and Yermonlinsky, long lost brothers? -
3/29/2003

----------------------

IN REGARDS TO BOB BENNETT:

"And if it makes you happy, I live a few states away from CA, not the
east coast."
Bob Bennett - "Eric Johnson is John Dough" - 8/16/2003

"Why the hell should I go to the US Open?"
Bob Bennett - "Eric Johnson is John Dough" - 8/16/2003

"I am a redneck American and I don't like people who are racist or
sexist."
Bob Bennett - "Re: US Women's Team Democratic Player Selection??" -
3/29/2003

"I am a novice chess player and playing chess is not my passion. My
son is the one who is into chess."
Bob Bennett - "Re: US Women's Team Democratic Player Selection??" -
3/29/2003

"I am a successful restaurant owner. I own 16 of them in the tri-state
area."
Bob Bennett - "Re: US Women's Team Democratic Player Selection??" -
3/29/2003

"(I am) A good old red neck American-born who supports the best team
possible regardless if they are Americans or not. "
Bob Bannett - "Re: US Women's Team Democratic Player Selection??" -
3/29/2003

----------------------

IN REGARDS TO SUSAN POLGAR AND USCF GRANDMASTER OF THE YEAR:

"She helped created the Women's Olympiad Training Program, the best
training program for our top women in America. She brought in Garry
Kasparov and other world-class GMs to help out."
Bob Bennett - Yes!!!! Susan Polgar -- USCF GM of the year!!! -
06/05/2003

"No GM has done much more this year to promote Chess in America for
USCF than Zsuzsa Polgar. She gave up 20-30 times more money to play
for the US in the upcoming Olympiad instead of Hungary with her
sisters Judit, Sofia and WGM Dembo."
Bob Bennett - Yes!!!! Susan Polgar -- USCF GM of the year!!! -
06/05/2003

"She has also done so many other things for USCF to help promote chess
in America that the public does not even know about since she is quite
humble and modest."
Bob Bennett - Yes!!!! Susan Polgar -- USCF GM of the year!!! -
06/05/2003

"Secondly, Frederic (Friedel) is a friend of Zsuzsa for 20 years, that
is why he wrote about her."
Bob Bennett - Re: Susan Polgar- USCF Grandmaster of the Year -
06/05/2003

"The Grandmaster of the Year award is for the works of these GMs to
promote chess in America. It has nothing to do with tournament play.
No GM in America has done more for USCF this year than Zsuzsa."
Bob Bennett - Re: Susan Polgar- USCF Grandmaster of the Year -
06/05/2003

----------------------

IN REGARDS TO SUSAN POLGAR AND THE WORLD CHAMPION TITLE

"According to FIDE rules, the minimum prize funds for the women's
world championship are $200,000. "
Bob Bennett - Re: if you think Polgar is still world champion -
02/18/03

"She took them to court and FIDE lost on ALL counts. The problem was
she was only rewarded $25,000 due to the fact the Kirsan claimed that
FIDE was broke."
Bob Bennett - Re: if you think Polgar is still world champion -
02/18/03

"After expenses and lawyer's fees, there was nothing left of this
money except a moral victory that she was right all along."
Bob Bennett - Re: if you think Polgar is still world champion -
02/18/03

"She was very unhappy with the book herself. If anyone knows Zsuzsa
personally, you would understand that it was not the same person who
wrote the book "
Bob Bennett - Re: if you think Polgar is still world champion -
02/18/03

"In fact, that was one of her reasons for the divorce beside emotional
and mental abuse by him for many years, etc."
Bob Bennett - Re: if you think Polgar is still world champion -
02/18/03

What do you think now Bob?

JD

Mike Murray

unread,
Sep 27, 2007, 10:19:54 AM9/27/07
to
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007 02:04:14 -0700, The Historian
<neil.the...@gmail.com> wrote:

<... >

In the Great Final Post-Mortem, someone will be called to account,
"Why?" and the accused will respond, "Uhh, because I could".

Good post, Neil.

samsloan

unread,
Sep 27, 2007, 7:02:27 PM9/27/07
to
The following post of mine was removed by the moderators, with the
rest of the thread, because it referred by name to the USCF leader who
is strongly indicated by technical evidence (IP addresses, logs) etc
to be responsible for the Fake Sam Sloan/Fake Ray Gordon posts on
Usenet. I am reposting it with the name replaced everywhere by Mr X

gregory wrote:Before we assign guilt on a USCF member that never
should have been investigated by a volunteer developer in the first
place, I would like to ask the following questions. Unless one can
prove that all of these statments are false or negative, then we are
falsely accusing someone of doing something wrong.

- 1) Can someone spoof an IP?
- 2) Is it possible that Brian, or Hal modified the log files to
fit his investigation?
- 3) Can the log files on usenet be modified by an usenet
volunteer?
- 4) Just because you have an IP, one can't actually be sure who
actually made the post, correct?
- 5) Can a computer be hacked and taken over from a remote user?
- 6) Your job desription does not contain the title of 'technical
forensic expert, correct?

My answers:

1) Yes, IP spoofing is fairly trivial-- DoS the machine you're
attempting to spoof, and send packets in lieu of this machine. While
on a LAN, it is only necessary to switch your machine's network card
into promiscous mode in order to view the traffic actually intended
for the other machine, and hence you do not need to "fly blind".

2) Yes, Brian has admitted that he has a great deal of power, and
if he can read the log files, he can change them too. Nolan also
posted recently that Hal's entire team has access to the database. The
log files could very well have been modified, by an agressive
volunteer no less.

3) I don't know. I tend to avoid usenet.

4) Correct.

5) Absolutely. It happens all of the time.

6) Correct.

I suggest that the ethics committee look into this if necessary
(they better hire a proffesional technical forensic expert if they are
going to be fair), remove all privileged access from the volunteer
that performed this 'investigation', and move on without assigning
guilt.

Since, as another person has said, the evidence is overwhelming, these
questions fall into the "grasping at straws" category. I am sure we
will see a variety of grasping-at-straws defenses, either by the
person involved or supporters. So far, we have seen two of these.

I. The IP Spoofing Defense. The first grasping-at-straws defense is
that the IP addresses were spoofed. According to this version of
reality, any experienced person can spoof IP addresses on Usenet. One
problem with the theory is that this is not true, but let's not get
hung up on that. There is a second problem. Perhaps you can spoof IP
addresses in Usenet, but what IP address do you spoof? For this
defense to hold water, the person who was actually responsible for the
Fake Ray Gordon/Fake Sam Sloan posts on Usenet must have been able to
identify, at will, the IP addresses used by Mr X, as well as the User
Agent strings sent by his browser. How did he do that?

Sticking with this theory, it means that over the course of 18 months,
somebody was stalking Mr X's IP addresses and browser strings and
whenever he went to make one of his Fake Ray Gordon/Fake Sam Sloan
posts on Usenet, he took care to match Mr X's IP address and User
Agent string. During the period when Mr X was using his AOL account,
Fake Ray Gordon didn't have to match Mr X's AOL IP exactly, since it
is common knowlege that AOL IP addresses change all the time. But he
did take care to fake an IP address in the same block from which AOL
was assigning addresses to Mr X. When Mr X's IP address changed, the
perpetrator knew that, and changed to the new IP address, or if it was
an AOL IP, he changed to one that was close. When Mr X changed
computers, the perpetrator knew that, and switched user agent strings.
So, over the course of 18 months, starting in March 2006, in addition
to attacking Sam Sloan, Ray Gordon, the USCF, and all the others in
thousands of posts (and indeed apparently hardly ever mentioning Mr
X), the perpetrator was really preparing a long-range frame up of Mr
X. He hoped apparently that somebody else with access to Mr X IP
addresses and user agent strings would eventually notice the
coincidence, and come to the overwhelmingly obvious (but wrong,
according to this story) conclusion that Mr X was the person
responsible for the FRG/FSS posts. And, to cement the case, when the
evidence started to come out in this forum a couple of days ago, the
perpetrator (who happened to be monitoring the USCF Issues forum at
that exact moment) immediately went onto the Usenet and spent the next
several hours -- the entire night -- removing large numbers of his FRG/
FSS posts in order to rub out some of the evidence that he had planted
against Mr X -- realizing, apparently, that there would still be
plenty of evidence left and that a frenzied(-looking) attempt to
remove some of it would make T look even more guilty, as if Mr X was
trying desperately to cover his tracks. This is the IP spoofing
theory, and it is the theory which Mr X has put forward himself. "Any
experienced individual with access to my IP can spoof it easily" Mr X
says on his web site. You have to believe all this if you want to go
with the IP spoofing theory.

II. The Falsified Evidence Theory. The second grasping-at-straws
theory is different and much simpler: the evidence is all fabricated.
This is another "I've been framed" defense, but this time the framer
isn't the Fake Sam Sloan, but somebody at the USCF trying to make it
look like Mr X is the Fake Sam Sloan. Like the other "I've been
framed" defense, this theory also attributes amazing technical powers
to someone, but in this theory the person with the amazing technical
powers isn't Fake Sam Sloan, it is me or someone else with access to
the USCF systems.

In this version of reality, I simply planted the IP addresses and user
agent strings that appeared in the Usenet posts by Fake Ray Gordon/
Fake Sam Sloan into the forum database and the logs. The technical
evidence against Mr X is overwhelming, but it is all fabricated by me,
this story goes. Or perhaps it wasn't me. Maybe I am just a dupe and
the doctoring of the database and the logs was done by someone else
with access to the uschess.org systems. In this theory, the IP
addresses and user agent strings on the Usenet posts from Fake Sam
Sloan/Fake Ray Gordon are the actual FSS/FRG IP addresses and browser
strings; but we do not in fact know what Mr X IP addresses and browser
strings were at these times. The ones in the logs are faked,
supposedly, in order to tie Mr X to the Fake Sam Sloan.

Several of Mr X's supporters (Nibbelin, Gregory) have put forward the
idea that the evidence, overwhelming as it seems, was all doctored by
USCF consultants on a vendetta against T, using their alarming hacker
powers. Who is this guy Mottershead, anyway? This theory is very
appealing to everybody who trusts Mr X. If somebody is going to be
suspected of stuff, let it be this guy Mottershead.

But as facile as this theory is for them, it does not hold up. There
are at least four serious problems with it.

A) The detailed information in the logs, etc, is completely consistent
with more general facts which could not have been falsified by anybody
at the USCF.. For example, Mr X lived in New York and had AOL. At that
time, the FRG/FSS posts on Usenet came from somebody who lived in or
near New York and had AOL. When Mr X moved to Texas, FRG/FSS moved to
Texas. When Mr X went to Mexico City for the World Chess Championship,
FRG/FSS went to Mexico City. At times when Mr X was known to be out of
the country, the FRG/FSS posts stop.

B) I have access to the the Joomla-phpBB3 bridge log, but I do not
have access to the actual web logs generated by the Apache web server,
and I could not doctor those. If I doctored the Joomla-phpBB3 bridge
logs, then this would become immediately apparent by comparing the
bridge logs with the Apache web logs. The two would have to be
completely in sync, and they wouldn't be if one of them had been
doctored. This is where my evil super powers are invoked: no problem,
the adherents of this theory will say. Mottershead is a genius hacker,
and of course he had access to the Apache logs too, even though it
looks like he didn't. They will say that it would be trivial for me to
have broken through the access controls and simply doctored all the
Apache logs too. But there is a third problem.

C) The IP addresses that Mr X was actually assigned when he was in
Texas and in Mexico City (different than the supposedly doctored ones
in the uschess.org logs and different from the Fake Sam Sloan ones in
the Usenet posts) are in the records of the ISP's. If this whole
matter ends up in court, those ISP records can be subpoenaed. At least
the Texas ones can be. If I am doctoring all this evidence, I must
know that I cannot win in the end, because the ISP logs can
conclusively prove what Mr X IP addresses actually were on the dates
in question, and the game would then be up for me. I would have to be
taking the enormous risk that those records can never be subpoenaed.
To overcome this, my genius as a hacker would also have to extend to
being able to penetrate the ISP's systems and doctor those logs too.

D) There is a fourth issue. In this theory, there is in fact a Fake
Ray Gordon and Fake Sam Sloan out there, and he is the person
responsible for those thousands of terrible posts on Usenet. In this
theory, he isn't the person trying to frame Mr X; somebody else is
doing so, trying to make it look like Mr X is the Fake Sam Sloan. Why
then, when I released this falsified evidence designed to frame Mr X
(supposedly) did the "real Fake Ray Gordon/Fake Sam Sloan" cooperate
by rushing to Usenet to delete numerous recent posts of his? During
the 18 months he has been posting on Usenet, FRG has hardly ever
mentioned Mr X. Mr X has not been one of his targets. Why then would
he suddenly cooperate with those supposedly attempting to frame Mr X
by spending the whole night deleting his posts so as to make it look
like Mr X was attempting to cover his tracks?

One might start to wonder why, if I am this unstoppable a hacker, I am
not using my amazing skills to become fabulously wealthy, rather than
wasting time trying to make somebody look bad.

Ray Gordon, creator of the "pivot"

unread,
Sep 28, 2007, 3:23:51 AM9/28/07
to
> 2) Yes, Brian has admitted that he has a great deal of power, and
> if he can read the log files, he can change them too.

There would be other ways of establishing the identity.


--
Ray Gordon, The ORIGINAL Lifestyle Seduction Guru

http://www.cybersheet.com/library.html
Includes 29 Reasons Not To Be A Nice Guy

Ray's new "Project 5000" is here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/project-5000

This group will be restricted to 5,000 members. All new theory from the
creator of the PIVOT!

Don't rely on overexposed, mass-marketed commercial seduction methods which
have been rendered worthless through mainstream media exposure. It really

is game over for community material. Beware of Milli Vanilli gurus who
stole their ideas from others!

Kenneth Sloan

unread,
Sep 26, 2007, 11:23:34 PM9/26/07
to
Practice what you preach, and people might listen to you.

--
Kenneth Sloan Kennet...@gmail.com
Computer and Information Sciences +1-205-932-2213
University of Alabama at Birmingham FAX +1-205-934-5473
Birmingham, AL 35294-1170 http://www.cis.uab.edu/sloan/

samsloan

unread,
Oct 22, 2007, 11:16:26 AM10/22/07
to
On Sep 26, 8:21 am, "OdessaChess" <OdessaCh...@russia.com> wrote:
> News Flash! Paul Truong Illustrates New Professionalism for USCF Board
> Members!
>
> Volunteer USCF IT guy Brian Mothershead has definitive proof that Paul
> Truong has been posting (more than 5000 posts) as the fake Sam Sloan and Ray
> Gordon and has more recently posted asJackassLafferty. Mr. Truong has

> used these fake identifications to launch numerous personal attacks of a
> scurrilous nature.
>
> What can the USCF do to rid itself of this unethical man? The Ethics Board
> is probably powerless even if it had the backbone to stand up to him. A
> recall petition? Too many scholastic nebbishes who will keep their heads in
> the sand to feather their own nests.
>
> Maybe Sam Sloan, BrianLaffertyor Ray Gordon will sue Truong for defamation

> in the courts of New York or Texas.

I want to point out that the above posting was the first news of the
proof that Paul Truong in the Fake Sam Sloan.

Even though it was posted on September 26, 2007, Bill Goichberg knew
about this finding six days earlier.

In the one full month since this happened, the board has done nothing
about this situation.

Sam Sloan

help bot

unread,
Oct 22, 2007, 10:54:06 PM10/22/07
to
On Sep 26, 1:47 pm, kr...@citgo.com wrote:

> Hmmm I would almost advise Sam and Ray to sue for defamation but then
> it is Sam and Ray we are talking about ...


You need to understand that winning (such a lawsuit) is
not everything. There is also the fame, the glory, the
attention these guys will get for suing and afterward for
having sued the USCF; that is the real payoff here. So it's
not simply a question of defamation of alleged character.


-- help bot

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages