PDA

View Full Version : split from Underrated Juniors



PHAT
13-12-2004, 12:12 AM
Yes, 2 systems certainly.

FMD, we are gonna be burnt at the stake. :D

Alan Shore
13-12-2004, 12:18 AM
FMD, we are gonna be burnt at the stake. :D

It's the equivalent of letting kids believe there is a Santa Claus...

........

And there is kids!

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2004, 12:19 AM
FMD, we are gonna be burnt at the stake. :D
No, I'm just going to ignore you and DR.

Cat
13-12-2004, 09:27 AM
FMD, we are gonna be burnt at the stake. :D

I saw a kid with 3 eyes yesterday and a newt with 4 arms. A flock of seagulls flew overhead and completed a half circle. My grandmother has just had kittens and I saw a man with green hair flying over a palm tree. What are we to make of all this?bad omens indeed. I consulted the oracle and she said not to go out on Wednesday, and I must slaughter three puppies by friday. Anyone got any puppies?

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2004, 10:03 AM
I saw a kid with 3 eyes yesterday and a newt with 4 arms. A flock of seagulls flew overhead and completed a half circle. My grandmother has just had kittens and I saw a man with green hair flying over a palm tree. What are we to make of all this?bad omens indeed. I consulted the oracle and she said not to go out on Wednesday, and I must slaughter three puppies by friday. Anyone got any puppies?
You really shouldnt have stopped taking your medication. ;)

Rincewind
13-12-2004, 10:22 AM
You really shouldnt have stopped taking your medication. ;)

I don't know Bill. I think that made more sense than this post...


Bill, it's not the maths thats the problem. Anyone can make 2+2=4. The question is one of functionality. What's the point, Bill?

In any pursuit kids need to see their ambitions fullfilled, their dreams realised. Without that there is nothing to strive for, to achieve. Kid's need encouragement, not false flattery but fair reward for effort.

The only tangible measure of progress for these kids is the rating system. It's like they're climbing a ladder. The trouble is that for these kids there ain't enough rungs in the ladder and they're left dangling.

Any mathematical model Bill is simply an abstract discription of the real world, in essence its meaningless. We construct these models to try to describe purpose, for some function. I understand why you produce these ratings, I understand what function you feel they serve. But the perception and expectations of the chess players is different - they feel it marks their performance, it gives them standing.

And thats exactly what their being sold as - a measure of their skill. And when they do all that is asked, and they perform against the best that we have and they see their skill measure go down, they get a tad disappointed.

Cat
13-12-2004, 11:34 AM
FMD, we are gonna be burnt at the stake. :D

Seems that BJC has volunteered to be The Witchfinder Persuevant! I thought he wasn't the religious type, maybe there's a little God in all of us! He's replaced KB as defender of the faith, presumably- you could be in for a rough ride BJC.

Rincewind
13-12-2004, 11:50 AM
He's replaced KB as defender of the faith

That presumes that there is some need to defend it. Current that does not appear to be the case.

Cat
13-12-2004, 12:17 PM
That presumes that there is some need to defend it. Current that does not appear to be the case.

OK BJC, if you're keen on taking over this mantle, why don't you chair an open forum on the current structure and regional problems? I think so far you have always maintained the trust of most of the BB & chess community. Lets set up a national forum to consider the present state of Australian Chess, to consider it's structure & to co-ordinate & recommend a medium and long term strategic plan, to make recommendations & report to the ACF.

We consider all aspects of the current structure - no holds barred and no emotive nonsense and come up with an agreed framework to move on to. Instead of us all expending our energies in different directions, lets provide a platform for open & genuine debate.

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2004, 12:29 PM
OK BJC, if you're keen on taking over this mantle, why don't you chair an open forum on the current structure and regional problems? I think so far you have always maintained the trust of most of the BB & chess community. Lets set up a national forum to consider the present state of Australian Chess, to consider it's structure & to co-ordinate & recommend a medium and long term strategic plan, to make recommendations & report to the ACF.
Yes, but you dont represent anyone.
Not the GC juniors, not the QLD juniors.
Your view is just your view.


We consider all aspects of the current structure - no holds barred and no emotive nonsense and come up with an agreed framework to move on to. Instead of us all expending our energies in different directions, lets provide a platform for open & genuine debate.
You are the one who carries on with a load of emotive nonesense.

Garvinator
13-12-2004, 12:38 PM
To Jenni,

Dont attempt to argue with David with facts and figures. He has his own opinion and doesnt want to know about facts and figures. I thought you were smarter than that ;) :lol: Remember my signature :whistle:

jenni
13-12-2004, 12:43 PM
To Jenni,

Dont attempt to argue with David with facts and figures. He has his own opinion and doesnt want to know about facts and figures. I thought you were smarter than that ;) :lol: Remember my signature :whistle:

You are right - I just have this silly belief that he is an intelligent person so has to respond to rational arguement, but I should know better. I will stop wasting my time and go and make some mince pies!

Garvinator
13-12-2004, 04:04 PM
Alot of the regular posters on here who hold positions of power and responsibility have become very scarred and irritated by anonymous posters. This means, sometimes unfairly, that anonymous posters are treated harshly when they ask questions.

You can choose to tell Bill by pm if you wish who you are. That would help matters.

Garvinator
13-12-2004, 04:12 PM
instead of playing twenty questions, how about typing out a long post and tell us where you are heading. Might make the process shorter :uhoh:

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2004, 04:22 PM
instead of playing twenty questions, how about typing out a long post and tell us where you are heading. Might make the process shorter :uhoh:
As identified over in the Privacy thread, Yamaha is apparently Sweeney, evading his ban.
Lets hope the admin significantly extends his ban because of this.

Cat
13-12-2004, 04:34 PM
As identified over in the Privacy thread, Yamaha is apparently Sweeney, evading his ban.
Lets hope the admin significantly extends his ban because of this.

Why is Matt banned, this is an outrage. Bring back Sweeney, he's the life and blood of the BB. This is the worst episode since CL left.

skip to my lou
13-12-2004, 04:38 PM
Bring back Sweeney, he's the life and blood of the BB.

Yeah right...

Cat
13-12-2004, 04:51 PM
Yeah right...


Matt's just a pussy cat - you guys are too bloody prissy. Reverse the banin the interest of free speech & justice.

skip to my lou
13-12-2004, 04:55 PM
Matt's just a pussy cat - you guys are too bloody prissy. Reverse the banin the interest of free speech & justice.

Do you even know what he was banned for?

Cat
13-12-2004, 05:48 PM
Do you even know what he was banned for?

I'd hardly be asking you if I already knew, would I? So what tiny misdemeanour provoked such outright sanction?

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2004, 06:01 PM
Why is Matt banned, this is an outrage. Bring back Sweeney, he's the life and blood of the BB. This is the worst episode since CL left.
He is more like untreated effulent spewing from a broken outlet.

Last night he was being crude once again for absolutely no good reason (and no it wasnt directed at me).
He is continually crude and vulgar on the main BB.
He regularly tells people to STFU and FO.
He deserves to be banned.

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2004, 06:03 PM
Matt's just a pussy cat - you guys are too bloody prissy. Reverse the banin the interest of free speech & justice.
His banning had nothing to do with free speech or justice.

He has been told on numerous occasions not to be crude and vulgar.
He chooses to continue to do so.
As such he deserves whatever punishment the admins dish out.

Cat
13-12-2004, 06:44 PM
He is more like untreated effulent spewing from a broken outlet.

Last night he was being crude once again for absolutely no good reason (and no it wasnt directed at me).
He is continually crude and vulgar on the main BB.
He regularly tells people to STFU and FO.
He deserves to be banned.

I know he's been known to utter the odd expletive now & then, but is a ban really necessary?

Bill Gletsos
13-12-2004, 06:46 PM
I know he's been known to utter the odd expletive now & then, but is a ban really necessary?
I think when he have been warned about it countless times, it is.

JGB
14-12-2004, 12:55 AM
I know he's been known to utter the odd expletive now & then, but is a ban really necessary?

David: If we want to promote chess and these forums we need to cut out the language in the 'open forums'. He has be warned and were hoping that he sorts himself out. Everyone else manages, why should Matthew be any different.

WhiteElephant
14-12-2004, 01:37 AM
David: If we want to promote chess and these forums we need to cut out the language in the 'open forums'. He has be warned and were hoping that he sorts himself out. Everyone else manages, why should Matthew be any different.

Did Matthew get banned because of his language? He suggested it was because of something he said in a PM and STML did not deny it. Perhaps there is something more to this than meets the eye.

JGB
14-12-2004, 01:56 AM
Did Matthew get banned because of his language? He suggested it was because of something he said in a PM and STML did not deny it. Perhaps there is something more to this than meets the eye.
From what I know, his constant foul language use caused the ban. Regarding this matter he has been warned before.

WhiteElephant
14-12-2004, 02:17 AM
From what I know, his constant foul language use caused the ban. Regarding this matter he has been warned before.

If that is the reason then fair enough. It is a pity because he is one of the more interesting and lively characters around here.

arosar
14-12-2004, 07:23 AM
If that is the reason then fair enough. It is a pity because he is one of the more interesting and lively characters around here.

Too right. Once we get into this banning habit, mate, this place will be like a born again christian bible study. Dead set.

AR

JGB
14-12-2004, 07:28 AM
Too right. Once we get into this banning habit, mate, this place will be like a born again christian bible study. Dead set.

AR
There is no habit, and we (most of us) really don't want to see Matthew or anyone alse go, but hey without limits and borders the place is finished in the long run.

arosar
14-12-2004, 07:32 AM
I'm telling you, just handicap him - like take away certain features or something. Lemme tell you right, if you lose the funny characters, mate, the BB will be dry. Dead set.

AR

JGB
14-12-2004, 07:37 AM
A little respect goes a long way. Matt could be back shortly.

arosar
14-12-2004, 08:08 AM
A little respect goes a long way.

Too right mate! How's about that 1100 bloke telling that 1800 bloke how to play some opening with a funny name?

AR

JGB
14-12-2004, 08:15 AM
Too right mate! How's about that 1100 bloke telling that 1800 bloke how to play some opening with a funny name?

AR

What bloke with which opening? Who is 1100 and who is 1800? :confused:

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 09:27 AM
Did Matthew get banned because of his language? He suggested it was because of something he said in a PM and STML did not deny it. Perhaps there is something more to this than meets the eye.
He appeared to be banned relatively quickly after I reported one of his posts in the cricket thread of the non chess section for unecessary langauage.

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 09:31 AM
If that is the reason then fair enough. It is a pity because he is one of the more interesting and lively characters around here.
Perhaps if you had received a STFU or a quick FO message from him to one of your posts (I am referring to his reponse to others more so than his reponses to me), then you may not necessarily hold that opinion.

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 09:33 AM
Too right. Once we get into this banning habit, mate, this place will be like a born again christian bible study. Dead set.

AR
He should be able to express himself without being crude and vulgar.
If he cannot then his fate is all his own doing.

arosar
14-12-2004, 09:40 AM
He should be able to express himself without being crude and vulgar.
If he cannot then his fate is all his own doing.

That's just his style Bill.

Look, we'll make him promise not to do it so frequently.

All this anger and vindictiveness. Not good. Not good for health and well-being. Let's all go have some tea or something.

AR

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 10:13 AM
That's just his style Bill.
I would suggest its unacceptable.
No one else is crude and vulgar.


Look, we'll make him promise not to do it so frequently.
Why frequently instead of not at all.
No one else resorts to the type of language he uses.

jenni
14-12-2004, 11:04 AM
He appeared to be banned relatively quickly after I reported one of his posts in the cricket thread of the non chess section for unecessary langauage.

He was doing his best to annoy everyone that night - I deleted some of his posts and I'm usually quite tolerant.

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 11:12 AM
He suggested it was because of something he said in a PM and STML did not deny it.

Deny what?

Cat
14-12-2004, 09:36 PM
He was doing his best to annoy everyone that night - I deleted some of his posts and I'm usually quite tolerant.

Yes, he does that very well, doesn't he? So that's the criterion for being banned now is it, being annoying? Is there anyone in particular we shouldn't annoy - I mean I'd hate to make the same mistake! Oh, by the way, if someone annoys me, who do I approach to request their expulsion? Is it 3 strikes & they're out, or can I eliminate them straight away? I guess not all of us might be as tolerant as you Jenni, I mean it's pretty bad when people are annoying, tut!!

jenni
14-12-2004, 10:46 PM
Yes, he does that very well, doesn't he? So that's the criterion for being banned now is it, being annoying? Is there anyone in particular we shouldn't annoy - I mean I'd hate to make the same mistake! Oh, by the way, if someone annoys me, who do I approach to request their expulsion? Is it 3 strikes & they're out, or can I eliminate them straight away? I guess not all of us might be as tolerant as you Jenni, I mean it's pretty bad when people are annoying, tut!!

Ok - here is one that I deleted.



Originally Posted by Tony_Chow
Scotch College owns a Ski Lodge in Mount Buller, close to the venue and this is where the Scotch College team will be staying.

Matt's post



TOTAL SCUMBAG PRIVATE SCHOOL FILTH.


You might think it is acceptable to say that sort of thing (totally unprovoked) about a bunch of nice kids (some of whom are probably there on scholarships) - I don't.

Defend Matt if you want to - when he is drunk (which he was when he posted that), I prefer to get rid of his stupidities. He was banned partly to give him time to sober up, because we get sick of deleting his obscenities when he is drunk.

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:01 PM
You might think it is acceptable to say that sort of thing (totally unprovoked) about a bunch of nice kids (some of whom are probably there on scholarships) - I don't.

Defend Matt if you want to - when he is drunk (which he was when he posted that), I prefer to get rid of his stupidities. He was banned partly to give him time to sober up, because we get sick of deleting his obscenities when he is drunk.
It was obvious it had nothing to do with him being annoying.
Hell, if that was the case he would have been banned ages ago.
It was abundantly clear from what was said on the board that Matt was banned because of his langauge.
The fact he was drunk didnt help.

David's missive above says more about David and his complete lack of objectivity and logic than anything else.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:06 PM
Ok - here is one that I deleted.



Matt's post



You might think it is acceptable to say that sort of thing (totally unprovoked) about a bunch of nice kids (some of whom are probably there on scholarships) - I don't.

.



Gee, by that token Bill should have been banned a hundred times already. Perhaps you should have issued prior warnings about injecting civility into BB dialogue before you chose to change the standard? Or maybe because you feel Tony is a nice boy you're using a different standard by which to judge Matt's expletives, whereas Bill vitriol is reserved for boorish old wrinklies like Matt and I or Cl or Dorophil or Cordover, or whoever you feel less disposed to. By all means assert standards, but apply them fairly across the board and even across the mirror.

jenni
14-12-2004, 11:07 PM
Gee, by that token Bill should have been banned a hundred times already. Perhaps you should have issued prior warnings about injecting civility into BB dialogue before you chose to change the standard?

These are kids - Bill's an adult - for someone who's always rabitting on about kids' self esteem you don't seem to understand the issue.

I have to admit you have lost all my respect - end of debate - I don't try and debate with idiots (unlike Bill who seems to enjoy the challenge).

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:15 PM
These are kids - Bill's an adult - for someone who's always rabitting on about kids' self esteem you don't seem to understand the issue.
David doesnt seem to understand many issues.


I have to admit you have lost all my respect - end of debate - I don't try and debate with idiots (unlike Bill who seems to enjoy the challenge).
True, but I'm beginning to tire of it.
It is like shooting ducks in a barrel.
Too easy and no challenge.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:18 PM
These are kids - Bill's an adult - for someone who's always rabitting on about kids' self esteem you don't seem to understand the issue.

I have to admit you have lost all my respect - end of debate - I don't try and debate with idiots (unlike Bill who seems to enjoy the challenge).


I object to that Jenni. I have never used personalised language against yourself. Strike out those words, desist from using insulting language, or ban yourself by your own standards. I am a very respectable individual in my community. Anyone I know reading the insults you guys hurl at me (or anyone who attempts to question the way things are being run) would be horrified. I have always attempted to remain polite and civil. Retract your comments or you face a strike (1 of 3).

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 11:19 PM
I object to that Jenni. I have never used personalised language against yourself. Strike out those words, desist from using insulting language, or ban yourself by your own standards. I am a very respectable individual in my community. Anyone I know reading the insults you guys hurl at me (or anyone who attempts to question the way things are being run) would be horrified. I have always attempted to remain polite and civil. Retract your comments or you face a strike (1 of 3).

I think this is the funniest post of 2004. It deserves a prize!

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:21 PM
I think this is the funniest post of 2004. It deserves a prize!
Cheers

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:21 PM
Gee, by that token Bill should have been banned a hundred times already. Perhaps you should have issued prior warnings about injecting civility into BB dialogue before you chose to change the standard? Or maybe because you feel Tony is a nice boy you're using a different standard by which to judge Matt's expletives, whereas Bill vitriol is reserved for boorish old wrinklies like Matt and I or Cl or Dorophil or Cordover, or whoever you feel less disposed to. By all means assert standards, but apply them fairly across the board and even across the mirror.
I doubt you will find any place where I have told someone to STFU or to FO.
Your mate Matt does it all the time.

In fact your failure to ever criticise him for his crude and vulgar langauge, makes a total mockery of your comments regarding juniors and chess.

I note you added to your post after jenni responded.

jenni
14-12-2004, 11:22 PM
I think this is the funniest post of 2004. It deserves a prize!

I have to admit I wondered whether it was tongue in cheek - I almost felt sorry for my obscene language.

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:22 PM
I think this is the funniest post of 2004. It deserves a prize!
Yes, a booby prize.

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:25 PM
I have always attempted to remain polite and civil.
The board is full of cases where you have clearly failed in this regard.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:28 PM
I doubt you will find any place where I have told someone to STFU or to FO.
Your mate Matt does it all the time.

In fact your failure to ever criticise him for his crude and vulgar langauge, makes a total mockery of your comments regarding juniors and chess.

Bill, through your own language you have made the ACF look like a laughing stock. The reason civility has been brought so low on this BB is you have found depths of abuse previously unimaginable. Time and time again you have been shameful in your choice of phrase. You lack wit, insight, you are naive and simply often ignorant. The end result is crass nonsense that mires the BB in mud and you of all people should not be judge on this issue. By all means we can all agree to greater levels of civility - but you have further to reach than anyone.

Rincewind
14-12-2004, 11:30 PM
True, but I'm beginning to tire of it.
It is like shooting ducks in a barrel.
Too easy and no challenge.

Tell me about it - but then they're like the patzer who is two rooks and a queen down and doesn't resign.

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 11:31 PM
Tell me about it - but then they're like the patzer who is two rooks and a queen down and doesn't resign.

Never give up without a fight! :D

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:33 PM
I have to admit I wondered whether it was tongue in cheek - I almost felt sorry for my obscene language.

Again these are appalling comments being hurled at me, you do nothing? If you chose to blatantly sidestep these issues then re-instate Matt. Your are acting duplicitously. I am all for improved standards, apply them fairly across the board. You banned Matt, you must ban Bill. If you refuse then Matt must be re-instated. The BB needs Matt more than Matt needs the BB.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:35 PM
Tell me about it - but then they're like the patzer who is two rooks and a queen down and doesn't resign.


BJC, you've always been such a pleasant chap until now. My last warning to you buddy.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:36 PM
The board is full of cases where you have clearly failed in this regard.

Find one!

Rincewind
14-12-2004, 11:36 PM
BJC, you've always been such a pleasant chap until now. My last warning to you buddy.

What made you think I was referring specificallly to you?

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:37 PM
Bill, through your own language you have made the ACF look like a laughing stock. The reason civility has been brought so low on this BB is you have found depths of abuse previously unimaginable.
The most abusive individual on this board has been Matt.

Your total failure in criticising his foul and vulgar language just demonstrates what a complete hypocrite you are.



Time and time again you have been shameful in your choice of phrase.
There is no comparison in telling someone to STFU or to FO and calling someone a fool, moron, cretin or goose.


You lack wit, insight, you are naive and simply often ignorant.
Sounds like you are describing yourself again.


The end result is crass nonsense that mires the BB in mud and you of all people should not be judge on this issue.
The majority of crass nonesense posted on this BB is from Matt and you.


By all means we can all agree to greater levels of civility - but you have further to reach than anyone.
My level of civility may not be on the same level as Barry's or Jenni's but my level of civility is so far above Matt's I would have to get on my knees to reach him in the gutter.
As for your level of civility, it isnt much better than Matt's.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:38 PM
What made you think I was referring specificallly to you?
Oops

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 11:39 PM
* skip fails to understand what is going on.

Why is Mr. Richards issuing warnings and strikes?

Garvinator
14-12-2004, 11:40 PM
hmm, two moderators and an admin involved in a flamewar :lol: :whistle:
Might be time for a thread split and this rubbish moved to the non chess section. Seems like this thread went away from ratings quite a few posts ago :P

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 11:42 PM
hmm, two moderators and an admin involved in a flamewar :lol: :whistle:
Might be time for a thread split and this rubbish moved to the non chess section. Seems like this thread went away from ratings quite a few posts ago :P

Hey, ... I'm not involved in anything, I'm just watching.

Garvinator
14-12-2004, 11:44 PM
I think this is the funniest post of 2004. It deserves a prize!
maybe a best post for 2004 award :eek: :lol:

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 11:46 PM
maybe a best post for 2004 award :eek: :lol:

Not a bad idea.

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:46 PM
Find one!
In the thread David's Debating Skills in the non chess section which was split from the September 2004 ratings thread you said to kegless

Greg, your pitiful intellect is now on display for all to see.

No doubt just a simple case of you demonstrating your civility.

Bill Gletsos
14-12-2004, 11:48 PM
What made you think I was referring specificallly to you?
Probably a case of if the shoe fits. :hand:

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:50 PM
The most abusive individual on this board has been Matt.

Your total failure in criticising his foul and vulgar language just demonstrates what a complete hypocrite you are.



There is no comparison in telling someone to STFU or to FO and calling someone a fool, moron, cretin or goose.


Sounds like you are describing yourself again.


The majority of crass nonesense posted on this BB is from Matt and you.


My level of civility may not be on the same level as Barry's or Jenni's but my level of civility is so far above Matt's I would have to get on my knees to reach him in the gutter.
As for your level of civility, it isnt much better than Matt's.

Bill, it takes 2 to tango and you have been a wonderful dancing partner. Again I re-iterate I do not condone insulting or abusive language and I have never hurled gratuitous abuse at anyone. However, it has not escaped my attention that by & by, that has indeed been the preferred method of communication by many of the BB denizens, especially your good self. Now if this criterion is suddenly & unexpectedly being changed, out of the blue, without any clear or precise indication of this change a priori, then I think it is simply unfair to slap this on Matt without discharging the same standard across the board.

I should add that in supporting this new policy, I recognise also that habitual offenders like Matt and yourself will require some time to adjust. Perhaps if it were all agreed on a limited number of offensive remarks for a period of (say) 6 weeks, followed by a complete ban by February. Would that be enough time for you to adjust, Bill? Matt would of course, have to comply as a condition of reinstatement.

skip to my lou
14-12-2004, 11:53 PM
Matt would of course, have to comply as a condition of reinstatement.

He is only banned for 48 hours. The software automatically resinstates him once the ban time is expired.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:53 PM
hmm, two moderators and an admin involved in a flamewar :lol: :whistle:
Might be time for a thread split and this rubbish moved to the non chess section. Seems like this thread went away from ratings quite a few posts ago :P

And you can cut that out Garvin, if you ask to split another thread I shall demand your head.

Cat
14-12-2004, 11:55 PM
In the thread David's Debating Skills in the non chess section which was split from the September 2004 ratings thread you said to kegless


No doubt just a simple case of you demonstrating your civility.

Yes, but I did apologise. I recognise now that he is a very nice man, just easily led.

Cat
15-12-2004, 12:00 AM
He is only banned for 48 hours. The software automatically resinstates him once the ban time is expired.

Well that's ok then, but better to have forwarned than to have imposed this right out of left field. All I'm asking for is consistency and direction. What is allowed, what isn't.

My wife and kids are still getting over Bill's comments about my gene pool. I've never complained before because I thought abuse was a pre-requisite for BB entry. I approve of these new censures, let's get them out, loud & clear, so we all know where we are.

Garvinator
15-12-2004, 12:00 AM
And you can cut that out Garvin, if you ask to split another thread I shall demand your head.
maybe there is something in the fact that it seems like it is the threads that you participate in that i ask for a thread split? Hey i could have been much worse (or is that better for the bb) and asked for all non underrated junior thread specific posts to be deleted from this thread :hand:

If you wanted to talk about Matts ban and possible moderation errors, you could have easily started a new thread in one of the non chess sections.

You seem to struggle with the concept that just because I ask for something, it doesnt mean I always get what I ask for.

skip to my lou
15-12-2004, 12:03 AM
All I'm asking for is consistency and direction. What is allowed, what isn't.

Okay, I'll think about it. You need to give me a couple of months to think about it and implement something.

Bill Gletsos
15-12-2004, 12:05 AM
Bill, it takes 2 to tango and you have been a wonderful dancing partner. Again I re-iterate I do not condone insulting or abusive language and I have never hurled gratuitous abuse at anyone.
Your failure to criticise Mat's foul and vulgar langauage is a defacto condoning of it.


However, it has not escaped my attention that by & by, that has indeed been the preferred method of communication by many of the BB denizens, especially your good self.
There is a significant difference between telling people to SRFU, to FO, to being crude and vulgar (all the things Matt does) and the language used by myself and others on this board.



Now if this criterion is suddenly & unexpectedly being changed, out of the blue, without any clear or precise indication of this change a priori, then I think it is simply unfair to slap this on Matt without discharging the same standard across the board.
No change in policy as far as I can see at all.
Crude and vulgar language has nearly always been ediyed or deleted by the mods. Matt was being crude and posting drunk. He was banned because of it.
No one else behaves in that manner on the board.



I should add that in supporting this new policy, I recognise also that habitual offenders like Matt and yourself will require some time to adjust.
This is where you lack all logic. No wonder jenni called you an idiot.
There is no new policy.
My language has never been at all similar to Matt's.
Matt was banned for being crude and posting whilst drunk.
No one else does that.



Perhaps if it were all agreed on a limited number of offensive remarks for a period of (say) 6 weeks, followed by a complete ban by February. Would that be enough time for you to adjust, Bill? Matt would of course, have to comply as a condition of reinstatement.
I already comply with the policy of the board.
Nowhere is it stated that the policy of the board restricts calling someone a moron, idiot, cretin or goose. Nor does it restict anyone from calling into question the credibilty of those who continually make statements that misrepresent the facts.

I dont tell others to STFU or FO even if at times I might feel like it.

The mods and the admins have made it clear that foul, crude and vulgar language will not be tolerated.
Matt has been repeatedly waned about this. He takes no apparent notice.

Bill Gletsos
15-12-2004, 12:11 AM
Well that's ok then, but better to have forwarned than to have imposed this right out of left field. All I'm asking for is consistency and direction. What is allowed, what isn't.
Sweeney had been repeatedly warned over his language.


My wife and kids are still getting over Bill's comments about my gene pool.
I claim I never said it. Other than Matt not one other BB poster backed up your claim. There was no post where it appeared nor was there a post where it was likely to have appeared.


I've never complained before because I thought abuse was a pre-requisite for BB entry.
You apparently fail to see the difference between crude and vulgar language and calling someone a moron or a fool.



I approve of these new censures, let's get them out, loud & clear, so we all know where we are.
What new censures.
Matt's banning was not based on any new censure.

Bill Gletsos
15-12-2004, 12:44 AM
whereas Bill vitriol is reserved for boorish old wrinklies like Matt and I or Cl or Dorophil or Cordover
I have only regularly got stuck into Matt and you and I believe you both got exactly what you deserved.

With regards to CL is was mainly over his self nominating for the best post and whether Kevin called him a goose or not. In fact it was others and not I who went after trying to determine his identity, which eventually drive him away.

As for Dorophil, I think you will find he was rude to me well before I responded. Others are getting stuck into him far more than I ever did.

As for Cordover I never abused him. I never called him a goose, a moron or an idiot. I just questioned the validity of some of his claims.

There are many people on here I have disagreed with who I have not abused. I disagreed with Paul S about a number of things but have not abused him. I have disagreed with Barry on a number of occasions in the Arbiters Corner threads and have not abused him. I have even disagreed with kegless on the 150 and 70 point uplift but have not abused him.

arosar
15-12-2004, 07:14 AM
You seem to struggle with the concept that just because I ask for something, it doesnt mean I always get what I ask for.

Yeah, but you are a bit of an annoying bastard sometimes mate. With CL-like sycophantic tendencies. Just leave things be and stay out of people's business.

Can you manage that?

AR

arosar
15-12-2004, 07:16 AM
He is only banned for 48 hours. The software automatically resinstates him once the ban time is expired.

Isn't it more than 48 hours already?

AR

ursogr8
15-12-2004, 07:19 AM
Your failure to criticise Mat's foul and vulgar langauage is a defacto condoning of it.
Bill

I am shocked.
I thought we agreed that this black and white statement of yours deserved abandonment. Surely you are not going to regress back to it. Are you going to require that Greg, george, and firegoat7 also come onto the board and criticise Matt's language? Tell me that defacto condoning is not what you really meant.





I already comply with the policy of the board.
Nowhere is it stated that the policy of the board restricts calling someone a moron, idiot, cretin or goose. Nor does it restict anyone from calling into question the credibilty of those who continually make statements that misrepresent the facts.

Well, not strictly true Bill. You do not comply with some policy of the board.
The policy of the board is not only the written word but also the actions of the mods and admins.
Given that K. has moved a thread, related to the ITEM you moved personally at the 2003 NSWCA AGM, to the Coffee Lounge, due to excessive and boring use of the four insults by you, then it is clear that you did not comply with that unwritten policy.

starter

arosar
15-12-2004, 07:20 AM
Matt's post:

<something about private school kids>

You might think it is acceptable to say that sort of thing (totally unprovoked) about a bunch of nice kids (some of whom are probably there on scholarships) - I don't.

OK . . . maybe it's not quite correct to suggest all are scumbag. But surely you agree some are. Right, love?

AR

arosar
15-12-2004, 07:24 AM
Given that K. has moved a thread, related to the ITEM you moved personally at the 2003 NSWCA AGM, to the Coffee Lounge, due excessive and boring use of the four insults by you, then it is clear that you did not comply with that unwritten policy.

Bill's position, unfortunately, is problematic. Particularly so is his assumption that readers will sorta somehow instinctively distinguish between Bill the Joe, Bill the Rater or Bill the Prez.

PaulS was correct.

AR

ursogr8
15-12-2004, 07:27 AM
As for Cordover I never abused him. I never called him a goose, a moron or an idiot. I just questioned the validity of some of his claims.



The jury is still out on this one Bill.

1 We have not heard from K. just which of the posts the GURU took exception too. Yours may have been part of it, maybe not.
2 We have not heard back from KB who said he would read the entire thread and report back to us re the offendings. Yours may have been part of it, maybe not.

starter

ursogr8
15-12-2004, 07:39 AM
Bill's position, unfortunately, is problematic. Particularly so is his assumption that readers will sorta somehow instinctively distinguish between Bill the Joe, Bill the Rater or Bill the Prez.

PaulS was correct.

AR

Good morning to you Amiel

On the NSW Chess CENTRE thread only two Bill's came out to play. (Bill the Rater was nowhere to be seen. Which is a pity because he is most likeable.)
And then both these Bill's were sent to detention in the corner Coffee Lounge.
I have been musing if this detention ever finishes?

starter

ps...How do you feel about posting a bit more on PRIVACY...I want to get my bet on early. :uhoh:

Bill Gletsos
15-12-2004, 09:04 AM
The jury is still out on this one Bill.
The only one out on this is you.



1 We have not heard from K. just which of the posts the GURU took exception too. Yours may have been part of it, maybe not.
2 We have not heard back from KB who said he would read the entire thread and report back to us re the offendings. Yours may have been part of it, maybe not.
All of this is irrelevant to my statement above.
DR suggested I abused Cordover.
I didnt abuse him.

jenni
15-12-2004, 03:25 PM
OK . . . maybe it's not quite correct to suggest all are scumbag. But surely you agree some are. Right, love?

ARI just don't think it is dependent on the type of school. I know revolting kids from Government, Catholic and Private schools. I also know some really fine kids from all those types as well. I take issue with Matt, totally unprovoked and using quite vicious language, having a go at the team from Scotch College. Two of the boys are regular chess players and seem very nice and the other boys all seemed nice young men as well. Do we really want them coming onto the BB and reading that sort of stuff about themselves.

If Matt had made that remark about a Muslim or an Aboriginal, we would have no hesitation in viewing it as racial vilification and I don't see this as any different.

I actually didn't mind the Scumbag bit it was the "filth" that got me deleting - basically I am not having Matt in a drunken fit abusing nice kids.

Ps - I am too old to be anyone's "love"

arosar
15-12-2004, 03:38 PM
If Matt had made that remark about a Muslim or an Aboriginal, we would have no hesitation in viewing it as racial vilification and I don't see this as any different.

I actually didn't mind the Scumbag bit it was the "filth" that got me deleting - basically I am not having Matt in a drunken fit abusing nice kids.

Ps - I am too old to be anyone's "love"

Yeah . . . fair enough.

AR

PHAT
16-12-2004, 09:35 AM
I just don't think it is dependent on the type of school. I know revolting kids from Government, Catholic and Private schools. I also know some really fine kids from all those types as well.

Bully for you. I do/have actually taught at many schools in both systems (private and public). My experiance is much much much wider than yours when it comes to characterising the stereo types.

Yesy there are scum bags in both systems. However, they are different kinds of scum bags. One will spit in someone's face and say "make me" and fight it out face to face. The other will do behave in public and then stab the person in the back with all the money/power/clout they have.

In all the junior tournaments I have been to, the worst three incidents I have witnessed have been instigated by private school students.
1. A violent assault requiring medical attention for bleeding.
2. A group (team) pointing and laughing an opponent who was crying over a loss in an important game.
3. A captain leading his team in a display of disrespect - "Quick, hold your nose, it's a public school [team]."




I take issue with Matt, totally unprovoked and using quite vicious language, having a go at the team from Scotch College. Two of the boys are regular chess players and seem very nice and the other boys all seemed nice young men as well. Do we really want them coming onto the BB and reading that sort of stuff about themselves.

Firstly, I labled the College as scumbag filth, not the individuals.

Secondly, I realy do want them to come to the BB and find out just how despised the unmerritedly privileged, really are.


If Matt had made that remark about a Muslim or an Aboriginal, we would have no hesitation in viewing it as racial vilification and I don't see this as any different.

OHHHHHH, now you see the privates as a race apart. How else could you be "viewing it as racial vilification."

Your snobbery is sickening


I actually didn't mind the Scumbag bit it was the "filth" that got me deleting - basically I am not having Matt in a drunken fit abusing nice kids.


I didn't abuse the kids, I abused the College.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 12:20 PM
I could repsond to the above, but I think jenni will give you a far better serve than I could, if she can be bothered wasting her time.

JohnH
16-12-2004, 12:26 PM
I just don't think it is dependent on the type of school. I know revolting kids from Government, Catholic and Private schools. I also know some really fine kids from all those types as well. I take issue with Matt, totally unprovoked and using quite vicious language, having a go at the team from Scotch College. Two of the boys are regular chess players and seem very nice and the other boys all seemed nice young men as well. Do we really want them coming onto the BB and reading that sort of stuff about themselves.

If Matt had made that remark about a Muslim or an Aboriginal, we would have no hesitation in viewing it as racial vilification and I don't see this as any different.

I actually didn't mind the Scumbag bit it was the "filth" that got me deleting - basically I am not having Matt in a drunken fit abusing nice kids.

Ps - I am too old to be anyone's "love"

Hi Jenni,

Unfortunately, I don't think you're going to get very far in this discussion.

You and I have been involved with juniors in chess for a number of years. We both know that no racial, ethnic or socio-econmic groups have a monopoly on either good or bad behaviour. Overwhelmingly the kids who play chess are a fine group who get along well toegether and, unlike many adults, are able to accept differences in each other and who do not stereotype.

Reasoned people will understand the points you are making. I'm afraid there's little hope with the others.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 01:04 PM
Overwhelmingly the kids who play chess are a fine group who get along well toegether ...

True.


Reasoned people will understand the points you are making. I'm afraid there's little hope with the others.

And this little gem stereotypes people who disagree with you as unreasonable and who do not "accept differences in each other."

If you wish to present yourself as a pillar of virtue, do not start life on the BB as a pseudo libertarian.



BTW, be a man and register under your full name. Around here, anonymous posters receive all the respect they deserve, none.

Trent Parker
16-12-2004, 01:08 PM
He might be embarrassed his name is John Howard :lol: :lol: :lol:

PHAT
16-12-2004, 01:13 PM
I could repsond to the above, but I think jenni will give you a far better serve than I could, ...

Thanks for sparing us your particular brand of response. We have all had a gutfull of your impoverished vocabulary of name calling.

arosar
16-12-2004, 01:15 PM
BTW, be a man and register under your full name. Around here, anonymous posters receive all the respect they deserve, none.

Man, oh man. You crucify yourself with that. See, that just hands your head over to Bill. I know who he is. Everyone else who's not a newbie knows who he is.

AR

JohnH
16-12-2004, 01:20 PM
True.



And this little gem stereotypes people who disagree with you as unreasonable and who do not "accept differences in each other."

If you wish to present yourself as a pillar of virtue, do not start life on the BB as a pseudo libertarian.



BTW, be a man and register under your full name. Around here, anonymous posters receive all the respect they deserve, none.

My name is John Huddleston.

I stand by my original comments to Jenni. I do not intend to get into insult trading with you.

Trent Parker
16-12-2004, 01:26 PM
OH hi john. Sorry about that! :oops: :oops: :embarras: :embarras:

Garvinator
16-12-2004, 01:26 PM
My name is John Huddleston.

I stand by my original comments to Jenni. I do not intend to get into insult trading with you.
ill make an assumption and say that you are the father or relative of Heather Huddleston ;)

You may not want to get involved in trading insults with sweeney, but he will do it anyways :wall:

PHAT
16-12-2004, 01:39 PM
My name is John Huddleston.

I stand by my original comments to Jenni. I do not intend to get into insult trading with you.

Good to see you have spine.

And I can respect your intent not to engage in further debate. Draw?

PHAT
16-12-2004, 01:49 PM
Man, oh man. You crucify yourself with that.

I'm not sweating.


See, that just hands your head over to Bill.

Bill has nothing.


I know who he is. Everyone else who's not a newbie knows who he is.

If that is true, it is arragent for him to assume that "everyone" will know who JohnH is. If he had come in as John Huddleston (real person), he would have been given more credence than all those other stinking anonymous posters who come in here, fire off a few bullits and leave.

We know now who he is.
We know now he is not here for the "banter."
All is cool.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 01:52 PM
OH hi john. Sorry about that! :oops: :oops: :embarras: :embarras:

So you should be. Calling someone John Howard will get you banned perminantly.

Trent Parker
16-12-2004, 01:56 PM
Why shouldnt he engage in further debate???

Welcome to the forums Mr Huddleston!

Kevin Bonham
16-12-2004, 02:28 PM
2 We have not heard back from KB who said he would read the entire thread and report back to us re the offendings.

Is that exactly what I said? It's been a long while; I thought (without searching to see exactly what I said) it was more along the lines of: I would look through it if I had time and determine whether the thread was resurrectable.

I haven't had time (this sort of thing requires very careful judgement when there are legal threats hanging in the air) and there seems to be no great public clamour for its revival so I think it is best to let sleeping geese lie.

Ian Rout
16-12-2004, 02:36 PM
So you should be. Calling someone John Howard will get you banned perminantly.
Doesn't the fact that John Howard went to a state school tend to undermine your argument?

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 02:45 PM
BTW, be a man and register under your full name. Around here, anonymous posters receive all the respect they deserve, none.
Thats an unfair and inaccurate generalisation.
Provided they dont nake stupid comments they are treated reasonable.
Some like you who register under their full name get the respect they deserve which is none.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 02:47 PM
Doesn't the fact that John Howard went to a state school tend to undermine your argument?
Be serious Ian, Matt would never let the facts get in the way of his arguing a case.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 02:49 PM
Thanks for sparing us your particular brand of response. We have all had a gutfull of your impoverished vocabulary of name calling.
Yes, instead we can sit back and listen to your particular brand of name calling.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 02:51 PM
Man, oh man. You crucify yourself with that. See, that just hands your head over to Bill. I know who he is. Everyone else who's not a newbie knows who he is.
No need for me to comment AR.
You did an admirable job here in highlighting why Matt has no credibilty.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 02:56 PM
Good to see you have spine.

And I can respect your intent not to engage in further debate. Draw?
Thats not what he said. He said nothing about further debate.
He said he cant be bothered in getting into trading insults with you.
That implies he expects you to insult him, but that he wont reciprocate.

jenni
16-12-2004, 03:05 PM
BTW, be a man and register under your full name. Around here, anonymous posters receive all the respect they deserve, none.

Anyone who is involved in Junior chess would work out pretty rapidly who he is, so not really anonymous.

I would rather be a snob than a drunkard. Its Christmas so I won't say anymore.

jenni
16-12-2004, 03:10 PM
My name is John Huddleston.

I stand by my original comments to Jenni. I do not intend to get into insult trading with you.

Thanks John - I appreciate your support! However I am not getting into a slanging match with Matt over this.

He might be able to be a hypocrite and say he is calling the school filth and not the kids, but the rest of us would treat that sort of butt covering semantics with the contempt it deserves.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 03:10 PM
Anyone who is involved in Junior chess would work out pretty rapidly who he is, so not really anonymous.

I would rather be a snob than a drunkard. Its Christmas so I won't say anymore.
Yes, wait till New Year. ;)

arosar
16-12-2004, 03:14 PM
Anyone who is involved in Junior chess would work out pretty rapidly who he is, so not really anonymous.

I would rather be a snob than a drunkard. Its Christmas so I won't say anymore.

Well, I'm not involved in junior chess but it was obvious. And something that Bill said to me elsewhere reminded me.

Anyway, jenni, you gotta admit right - some of these private school kids are spoilt brats no? Maybe Matt went overboard with filthy scum, etc, but some of us can appreciate where he's comin' from.

AR

jenni
16-12-2004, 04:37 PM
Anyway, jenni, you gotta admit right - some of these private school kids are spoilt brats no? Maybe Matt went overboard with filthy scum, etc, but some of us can appreciate where he's comin' from.

AR

Of course they are, but some of them are really nice and even the worst of them are not filth.

I guess what I hate about Matt and his class warfare is that it is so divisive. He basically is an inverse snob and glories in it. I believe all people are just people - I like people for who they are and how they behave, not for what school they went to or how much money they have. (Or for what school they didn't go to and how little money they have).

Trent Parker
16-12-2004, 04:46 PM
I tell you what gets me mad...... People bagging out public schools when their own child doesnt go to that school . That Pi.. Pees me right off

arosar
16-12-2004, 04:52 PM
Of course they are, but some of them are really nice and even the worst of them are not filth.

I guess what I hate about Matt and his class warfare is that it is so divisive. He basically is an inverse snob and glories in it. I believe all people are just people - I like people for who they are and how they behave, not for what school they went to or how much money they have. (Or for what school they didn't go to and how little money they have).

Yeah...yeah . . . I know what you're trying to say. You got no biff with me on this. I had a bit of both worlds I must admit. And that's why I'm so well balanced, if I may say so meself.

I think it has to do with expectations. See, with them private school types, you expect really top notch behaviour. But I tell you what, in chess - some of the worse opponents I come across are private school kids. You just about feel like smacking them. One time right, this kid, would play like this: he picks up the piece, puts it on a square, then before he let's go he looks around the board jerkin' his head up and down, side to side, I'm looking at him sittin' there and I'm thinkin', "FMD! What an ugly bastard!" I'm gettin' all hot up and frustrated cos he did it for every move. I tell you what, I nearly picked up me chair and smashed on him. Thank God I restrained meself.

You see what I'm saying?

AR

jenni
16-12-2004, 05:16 PM
Yeah...yeah . . . I know what you're trying to say. You got no biff with me on this. I had a bit of both worlds I must admit. And that's why I'm so well balanced, if I may say so meself.

I think it has to do with expectations. See, with them private school types, you expect really top notch behaviour. But I tell you what, in chess - some of the worse opponents I come across are private school kids. You just about feel like smacking them. One time right, this kid, would play like this: he picks up the piece, puts it on a square, then before he let's go he looks around the board jerkin' his head up and down, side to side, I'm looking at him sittin' there and I'm thinkin', "FMD! What an ugly bastard!" I'm gettin' all hot up and frustrated cos he did it for every move. I tell you what, I nearly picked up me chair and smashed on him. Thank God I restrained meself.

You see what I'm saying?

AR

I guess the question is would he have been the same whether he had been to a private school or not? I sometimes think it is easy to put labels on people. You know someone is irritating us so and they go to a private school, so we can think "private school moron" to ourselves. If he went to a Govt school, but came from Ireland, we would probably go " Irish Idiot". The human propensity to create divisions and labels is just so immense!

Alan Shore
16-12-2004, 05:23 PM
For goodness sake, why all the complaints? I went to a private school and not cos my parents were rich, in fact they sacrificed a lot to ensure I had a good education. Yes you probably will get a few snobs (mainly the parents, not the children) but on the whole there's far too much sterotyping going on.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 05:44 PM
Doesn't the fact that John Howard went to a state school tend to undermine your argument?

No. As I said, both public and private have their scum bags. Howard is one of our worst.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 05:45 PM
Some like you who register under their full name get the respect they deserve which is none.

Ever heard of a self fulfilling prophesy.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 06:00 PM
Yes, instead we can sit back and listen to your particular brand of name calling.

You should be paying me for your edification.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 06:06 PM
You [AR] did an admirable job here in highlighting why Matt has no credibilty.

That particular highligher pen needs replacing.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 06:23 PM
He said he cant be bothered in getting into trading insults with you.


Actually he said:

I do not intend to get into insult trading with you.

Him not being "bothered," as you put it, is a compete fabrication.

that bereft of imagination.]

PHAT
16-12-2004, 06:37 PM
Anyone who is involved in Junior chess would work out pretty rapidly who he is, so not really anonymous.

So what, most adult players aren't invovled in Junior chess, so, for most people he was anonymous.


I would rather be a snob than a drunkard.

But at least I am sober in the morning. You'll stay an up-yourself middle class frump for another 30 years.



Its Christmas so I won't say anymore.

You make me sick. You are just another part-time goody-goody Christian - only behaving in the festive season. Get with it grandma, while you bath in the glow of your own sanctimonious aura, the great unwashed hate your guts for sneering at their life style.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 06:42 PM
Yes, wait till New Year. ;)

Why should she. You don't stop your terrible tenuous tedious tosser talk.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 07:05 PM
Of course they are, but some of them are really nice and even the worst of them are not filth.

Yeahhhh, right. When I was a student at a private school, one of my class mates went to children's court for burying a cat with its head still out and mowing it off with the Victor. (True story!)


I guess what I hate about Matt and his class warfare is that it is so divisive. He basically is an inverse snob and glories in it.

Only a person gazeing down from the top of the heap could have the audacity to to condem the working class for their resentment.


I believe all people are just people - I like people for who they are and how they behave,

And you hate people who aren't like you or behave like you. If they swear and drink beer, you urinate on them and then tell them they stink.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 07:16 PM
That particular highligher pen needs replacing.
Your responses on this thread demonstrate the accuracy of my statement.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 07:18 PM
You should be paying me for your edification.
You arent worth paying anything for and you certainly are not edifying.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 07:22 PM
Him not being "bothered," as you put it, is a compete fabrication.
Dont try and twist it.
Its obvious that JohnH excepycs you to be insulting.
He is just pointing out that he wont reciprocate.


that bereft of imagination.]
Yes, instead we could all be foul mouthed, crude individuals like you.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 07:28 PM
So what, most adult players aren't invovled in Junior chess, so, for most people he was anonymous.
Its statements like this that highlight AR's previous post.


But at least I am sober in the morning.
You may be sober in the morning but you are still a crude, vulgar individual.



You make me sick.
You make many on here sick.


You are just another part-time goody-goody Christian - only behaving in the festive season. Get with it grandma, while you bath in the glow of your own sanctimonious aura, the great unwashed hate your guts for sneering at their life style.
And you of course respresent the great unwashed.

It like someone PM'd me recently.
I dont need continually to hightlight your short comings.
I just need to sit back and let you expose them yourself.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 07:52 PM
You arent worth paying anything for and you certainly are not edifying.
How long did it take you to construct that comeback.

I don't know why you try to match it with me or anyone for that matter), You just look a wannabe flamer. But you just glow in the dark like an acrid mosquito coil. Perhaps you should try not emarrassing yourself so much by displaying your obvious talentlessness for BB flaming.


Come on now Billy, in the passage above, I have engineered a couple of easy targets for you. See if you can use them to roast me.

jenni
16-12-2004, 07:56 PM
It like someone PM'd me recently.
I dont need continually to hightlight your short comings.
I just need to sit back and let you expose them yourself.

I have to agree with you Bill - his comments are so pathetic they would be beneath anyone to respond to except with a giggle. Just leave him to wallow in his own filth.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 07:58 PM
How long did it take you to construct that comeback.

I don't know why you try to match it with me or anyone for that matter), You just look a wannabe flamer. But you just glow in the dark like an acrid mosquito coil. Perhaps you should try not emarrassing yourself so much by displaying your obvious talentlessness for BB flaming.


Come on now Billy,
You dont get the luxury to call me Billy, neither here nor face to face.


in the passage above, I have engineered a couple of easy targets for you. See if you can use them to roast me.
There is no need for me to roast you.
I just need to sit back and watch you slowly stew in your own juices, eventually ending up as a dried out carcass.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 07:58 PM
It like someone PM'd me recently.
I dont need continually to hightlight your short comings.
I just need to sit back and let you expose them yourself.

That's odd, I got an almost identical PM. However, I knew it was really a plee from someone who feels sorry for you, for me to stop rubbing your nose in your own number twos.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 08:01 PM
I have to agree with you Bill - his comments are so pathetic they would be beneath anyone to respond to except with a giggle. Just leave him to wallow in his own filth.
Yes my mate Barry summed it up best when he said:

Never mudwrestle with a pig. You only get dirty, and the pig enjoys it.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 08:03 PM
That's odd, I got an almost identical PM. However, I knew it was really a plee from someone who feels sorry for you, for me to stop rubbing your nose in your own number twos.
And you had the temerity to criticise my comebacks.

That comeback of yours sounds like a childs, and not a very smart one at that.

skip to my lou
16-12-2004, 08:04 PM
I have engineered....

See Bill, I told you he is smart. He is, an engineer! Matthew, where did you get your degree? I suspect it is MIT, Bill what do you think? Matt, No need to be modest.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 08:06 PM
I have to agree with you Bill - his comments are so pathetic they would be beneath anyone to respond to except with a giggle. Just leave him to wallow in his own filth.

Ho bloody ho. That's right, take your bat and ball and go home now. You keep upping the ante, but when I see you and raise you, you fold and say "stupid game anyway." You better give away the HRT because it has extinguished your spark.

PHAT
16-12-2004, 08:15 PM
See Bill, I told you he is smart. He is, an engineer! Matthew, where did you get your degree? I suspect it is MIT, Bill what do you think? Matt, No need to be modest.

:hand: Sarcam out here on the main board too. You need to expand your opening repertoire.

JGB
16-12-2004, 08:24 PM
Ho bloody ho. That's right, take your bat and ball and go home now. You keep upping the ante, but when I see you and raise you, you fold and say "stupid game anyway."k.


...(smart) perhaps he does not want to get banned. ;)

skip to my lou
16-12-2004, 08:24 PM
You need to expand your opening repertoire.

Will you coach me?

Garvinator
16-12-2004, 08:33 PM
...(smart) perhaps he does not want to get banned. ;)
id rate that, getting banned from your own bb :lol: :lol:

JGB
16-12-2004, 08:35 PM
id rate that, getting banned from your own bb :lol: :lol:

I did not know Bill owned the board? ... he was speaking to Bill in that post. ;)

PHAT
16-12-2004, 08:35 PM
Will you coach me?

Look. I have read your [ehem] contributions to this BB. I have glimsed the inside of your mind, and frankly, I don't know how you manage to live in something that small.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 08:36 PM
Ho bloody ho. That's right, take your bat and ball and go home now. You keep upping the ante, but when I see you and raise you, you fold and say "stupid game anyway." You better give away the HRT because it has extinguished your spark.
No jenni has learnt not to debate idiots and fools or partake in pig wrestling.

I on the other hand, although knowing that as well, dont consider it a totally worthless pastime.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 08:39 PM
I did not know Bill owned the board? ... he was speaking to Bill in that post. ;)
Both you and gg are wrong.
In post #140 he was referring to jenni.

JGB
16-12-2004, 08:39 PM
Both you and gg are wrong.
In post #140 he was referring to jenni.
oops your right. :doh:

skip to my lou
16-12-2004, 08:43 PM
Look. I have read your [ehem] contributions to this BB.

Why the [ehem]?

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 08:45 PM
I have glimsed the inside of your mind, and frankly, I don't know how you manage to live in something that small.
No doubt you were looking thru the wrong end of the telescope again.

jenni
16-12-2004, 08:45 PM
Ho bloody ho. That's right, take your bat and ball and go home now. You keep upping the ante, but when I see you and raise you, you fold and say "stupid game anyway." You better give away the HRT because it has extinguished your spark.

Look Sweeney - don't think just becausee I'm being not mixing it with you, I've gone soft. Don't bloody push me.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 08:47 PM
Why the [ehem]?
I know this revelation will just shatter you but it would appear he wasnt impressed.
Of course a man of his intellect is bound to continally be frustrated by the intellect of others.

skip to my lou
16-12-2004, 08:49 PM
I know this relevation will just shatter you but it would appear he wasnt impressed.
Of course a man of his intellect is bound to continally be frustrated by the intellect of others.
I see I see.

Bill Gletsos
16-12-2004, 08:50 PM
Look Sweeney - don't think just becausee I'm being not mixing it with you, I've gone soft. Don't bloody push me.
Nudge nudge. ;)

Let me point you in the right direction. :lol:

PHAT
17-12-2004, 07:20 AM
Look Sweeney ... Don't bloody push me.

Push you? You are already staggering backwards under the influence of the the stench your made when you accused me of attacking individual kids when I had not. I quoted:



Scotch College owns a Ski Lodge in Mount Buller, close to the venue and this is where the Scotch College team will be staying.


and replied with:



TOTAL SCUMBAG PRIVATE SCHOOL FILTH


It is obvious that my insult was a stereo typing (as you said), and thus not directed at individuals, but directed at private schools in general.

I do not propose to give you anymore stick over your disgusting defense of privilege by birth. You can go and lick your wounds now.

C ya at MtB ;)

BTW, look here, LOL http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=1169&page=1&pp=10&highlight=Confessional

arosar
17-12-2004, 07:53 AM
Yeahhhh, right. When I was a student at a private school, one of my class mates went to children's court for burying a cat with its head still out and mowing it off with the Victor.

It's Victa you fool!! Even us blow-ins know that.

AR

jenni
17-12-2004, 09:06 AM
Push you? You are already staggering backwards under the influence of the the stench your made when you accused me of attacking individual kids when I had not.


As I said semantics. A "school" doesn't exist - it is at best a collection of buildings. A school is a community - it is created by past and present teachers and students. When you attack a school, you attack the people, including those really nice kids who are in the team.

Apart from that you also said




Secondly, I realy do want them to come to the BB and find out just how despised the unmerritedly privileged, really are.



That's aimed at the kids not at the "school".

What's happening here is you went over the top while drunk and you are now trying to wriggle out of it. Squirm a bit more Matt.




C ya at MtB ;)


Thank God, no! Unless you are playing the juniors?

jenni
17-12-2004, 09:57 AM
BTW, look here, LOL http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=1169&page=1&pp=10&highlight=Confessional

Huh - you are going to get everything you deserve now. :clap: Wait until you have to help her write essays on the Blessed Virgin Mary. :lol:

arosar
17-12-2004, 10:13 AM
Huh - you are going to get everything you deserve now. :clap: Wait until you have to help her write essays on the Blessed Virgin Mary. :lol:

What about doing the stations of the cross? Or the rosary? Catechism classes? Choir? Jesus Christ, those used to kill me!

AR

jenni
17-12-2004, 10:16 AM
What about doing the stations of the cross? Or the rosary? Catechism classes? Choir? Jesus Christ, those used to kill me!

AR

Quite liked the rosary - very peaceful. It was the nuns who killed me. :)

arosar
17-12-2004, 10:30 AM
You make me sick. You are just another part-time goody-goody Christian - only behaving in the festive season. Get with it grandma, while you bath in the glow of your own sanctimonious aura, the great unwashed hate your guts for sneering at their life style.

Bullshit! The great unwashed are major contributors to a $22B Xmas spending spree this year fella. And what's your problem with Xmas? I love it! Stop being so friggin' miserable all the time man. FMD! Always bringing bad vibes. I'm so gonna dob you in to Mrs. I. Yeah . . . she'll put you in your place. Mate, I reckon she'd have gone toe to toe with ya.

AR

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 10:36 AM
Unless you are playing the juniors?

He's going to play all the juniors and encourage them.

PHAT
17-12-2004, 10:45 AM
As I said semantics. A "school" doesn't exist - it is at best a collection of buildings. A school is a community - it is created by past and present teachers and students. When you attack a school, you attack the people, including those really nice kids who are in the team.

Thumbs down for this nonsence.


Apart from that you also said

"Secondly, I realy do want them to come to the BB and find out just how despised the unmerritedly privileged, really are."

That's aimed at the kids not at the "school".

True, but then again I am not gonna deny that it is the truth - they are, by and large, despised. The existance of top dollar private schools is abhorent a ought not be tollerated by a decent society. However, we do not have a decent society because it is controlled the FILTH in power - who were themselves schooled in in the private system want the system kept that way.



What's happening here is you went over the top while drunk ...

So get with the program toots. This whole BB is over the top it's the nature of cyber culture.

... and you are now trying to wriggle out of it.
Squirm a bit more Matt.

Pigs don't wriggle and squirm, they wallow.



Thank God, no!

There is no interventionist God, and hense none that will prevent your embarrassment at having to meet the drunkard pigs who you ridicule.

Cya :cool:

PHAT
17-12-2004, 10:48 AM
He's going to play all the juniors and encourage them.

You are barely worth even this much effort, lamer -> :hand:

jenni
17-12-2004, 10:53 AM
Pigs don't wriggle and squirm, they wallow.


I like pigs - very nice animals with a bad press.

I don't like worms.





and hense [sic] none that will prevent your embarrassment at having to meet the drunkard pigs who you ridicule.

Being snobby and elitist, I am never embarassed by meeting gutter dwellers - I just don't even see them.

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 10:54 AM
You are barely worth even this much effort, lamer -> :hand:

Mat 7, So high

jenni
17-12-2004, 10:58 AM
True, but then again I am not gonna deny that it is the truth - they are, by and large, despised. The existance of top dollar private schools is abhorent a ought not be tollerated by a decent society. However, we do not have a decent society because it is controlled the FILTH in power - who were themselves schooled in in the private system want the system kept that way.


Given that almost everyone I know at top dollar private schools seems to be there on scholarships, it seems that when you lay into chess kids who go to private schools, you are really having a go at very ordinary people. No doubt you would regard them as scabs for wanting to do something with their lives.

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:03 AM
And what's your problem with Xmas?

Nearly every family member of mine who has died (6) in recent years has died within a w few weeks of Xmas with one nana actually carcking it on Xmas day. And now this year, a cousin whom I went to school with for 4 years was found dead yesterday. All true I promise.

But all that is not why I have a problem with Xmas. It is the fact that normally awful people have to wait until Xmas before they "turn" nice for a while. It is so bogus. And normally nice people turn so awful when the relos get together.


FMD! Always bringing bad vibes. I'm so gonna dob you in to Mrs. I. Yeah . . . she'll put you in your place. Mate, I reckon she'd have gone toe to toe with ya.

And who is this Mrs I who needs a super serving of especially prepared bile?

arosar
17-12-2004, 11:09 AM
And who is this Mrs I who needs a super serving of especially prepared bile?

You idiot!! What the . . . ?? Friggin' hell!!!

You were . . . She was . . .

Never mind.

AR

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:13 AM
Given that almost everyone I know at top dollar private schools seems to be there on scholarships ... you are really having a go at very ordinary people.

The contradiction to this is, that "very ordinary people" don't get scholarships. :owned:

Further, privates schools should not be allowed to poach the best and brightest. It actually causes a loss of role models in the public schools. I know this to be true because I/we have seen it happen in Wollongong where the selective HS has take most of the top students from the surrounding area. The lack of stiff competition and good role models in the other HSs is devistating any culture of academic persuit in these schools.

Of course I would be amenable to a quid pro quo such as "For every scholarship you give, you have to take one of our darling psycho-underclass scum bags." But I don't see that happening to soon, eh.

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:18 AM
Mat 7, So high :hand:

arosar
17-12-2004, 11:18 AM
Oi! Btw, sorry to interrupt but don't you think snowflakes are like just the most fascinating of physical phenomena?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/photogalleries/snowflakes/index.html

AR

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 11:19 AM
Oi! Btw, sorry to interrupt but don't you think snowflakes are like just the most fascinating of physical phenomena?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/photogalleries/snowflakes/index.html

AR
Fractals

arosar
17-12-2004, 11:22 AM
Fractals

Frac...what? They're called snowflakes OK?

AR

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 11:25 AM
:hand:

Do you lay low she?

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 11:25 AM
Frac...what?

tals

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:25 AM
You idiot!! What the . . . ?? Friggin' hell!!!

You were . . . She was . . .

Never mind.

AR


OHHHH YES, LOL. No problemo. I will handle her, she's OK. She is just so enthusiastic about parenting with vigor :eek:

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:27 AM
Do you lay low she? :hand:

Rhubarb
17-12-2004, 11:33 AM
I would just like to say that as a pig-farming worm-eating private-school psycho-drunken HRT-injecting cat-mowing lame Catholic snobbish scumbag drunkard from the underclass, I think you should all just pick on someone your own size (I am also a midget).

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:35 AM
Oi! Btw, sorry to interrupt but don't you think snowflakes are like just the most fascinating of physical phenomena?


K might think he is clever blirting out "Fractles" - the only maths word he knows (other than 'hexagonal') pertaining to snow flakes, but that is so kindergarten.

Try: diffusion limited agregation in fractional phase space.

frogmogdog
17-12-2004, 11:38 AM
jenni -


Given that almost everyone I know at top dollar private schools seems to be there on scholarships, it seems that when you lay into chess kids who go to private schools, you are really having a go at very ordinary people.

i went to a top (by qld standards) private school on a scholarship but could have gone there without one. i think my position was typical. scholarship kids are usually not poor.


No doubt you would regard them as scabs for wanting to do something with their lives.

do you think parents who don't send their kids to private schools don't want the best for their children? do you think that bright kids should get more resources put into their education than dull ones? do you think we should organise a society so that rich kids get extra advantages?

is it possible even matt can occasionally make a valid point?

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:38 AM
I would just like to say that as a pig-farming worm-eating private-school psycho-drunken HRT-injecting cat-mowing lame Catholic snobbish scumbag drunkard from the underclass, I think you should all just pick on someone your own size (I am also a midget).

Have a cigarette.

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 11:39 AM
"Fractles"

:hmm: Atleast I know how to spell it.

jenni
17-12-2004, 11:39 AM
Further, privates schools should not be allowed to poach the best and brightest. It actually causes a loss of role models in the public schools. I know this to be true because I/we have seen it happen in Wollongong where the selective HS has take most of the top students from the surrounding area. The lack of stiff competition and good role models in the other HSs is devistating any culture of academic persuit in these schools.


.

Look I am not unsympathetic to this - but at the end of the day every parent (even you) is going to try and get the best learning environment for their child.

My kids went to parish Catholic schools (because I wanted them to learn all those wonderful things as pointed out by AR above). I don't know what it is like in other states, but the parish catholic schools are the repositories for the rejects that the Govt schools can't handle. The school had a high proportion of ADD kids, and kids from very dysfunctional families. It had its good side, as the kids grew up with friends from a range of backgrounds and it was also where they learned to play chess.

However I used to do a lot of help in the classroom stuff - particularly reading. (Some of the teachers felt I had a genius for teaching kids to read - I think it came down to a cargo cult. I had lots of pretty stickers - kids wanted stickers, so they were always falling over themselves to come and read for me. Also I used to teach them to sound out words - very out of fashion at that time).

Anyway the classrooms were just a shambles - the teachers spent more time trying to discipline kids and just creating enough quiet, so that they could teach. I always felt my kids leaned more stuff at home than they did at school.

So when I was making my choices for high school, I chose an environemnt where my kids could learn and every parent would do the same.

jenni
17-12-2004, 11:42 AM
I'm so gonna dob you in to Mrs. I. Yeah . . . she'll put you in your place. Mate, I reckon she'd have gone toe to toe with ya.

AR

Ooh - I've just realised who you are talking about!! Yes, yes please sick her onto him. :clap:

Bill Gletsos
17-12-2004, 11:43 AM
I would just like to say that as a pig-farming worm-eating private-school psycho-drunken HRT-injecting cat-mowing lame Catholic snobbish scumbag drunkard from the underclass, I think you should all just pick on someone your own size (I am also a midget).
And on top of that a decent bloke and a good chess player.
Thats two things you have over the neanderthal from the Gong.

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 11:45 AM
Try: diffusion limited agregation in fractional phase space.

Try: Going back to pre-school.

arosar
17-12-2004, 11:45 AM
do you think we should organise a society so that rich kids get extra advantages?

Too right mate.

Did youse all know that there's even a school here with a phkn shooting range? A shooting range for chrissakes! Lemme tell youse, some of these private schools are breedin' grounds for sick bastards.

AR

arosar
17-12-2004, 11:47 AM
Try: Going back to pre-school.

Man . . . what are you doing man? These one-liners ain't doing it for me.

Where's Kevo when you need him?

AR

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:48 AM
Yes, yes please sick her onto him. :clap:

To to that, he would have to bit, chew, swollow and spew. I think you mean "sic". ;)

PHAT
17-12-2004, 11:50 AM
:hmm: Atleast I know how to spell it. :hand:

jenni
17-12-2004, 11:56 AM
do you think parents who don't send their kids to private schools don't want the best for their children? do you think that bright kids should get more resources put into their education than dull ones? do you think we should organise a society so that rich kids get extra advantages?

is it possible even matt can occasionally make a valid point?

No he can't and I think you are missing the point. I suspect you havent read the whole thread (and who would blame you).


jenni -
i went to a top (by qld standards) private school on a scholarship but could have gone there without one. i think my position was typical. scholarship kids are usually not poor.


My husband went to a top queensland private school on a scholarship - and they definitely could not have afforded it without a scholarship, as his family were mega battlers. Once again all different types - you just can't generalise circumstances.

No-one is saying that private schools are better than government ones, or that parents who send their kids to private schools are doing more for their kids than ones who choose Govt.

it is just all about choice. People make their choices according to what they think and what their priorities are.

I would find some-one who laid into governement schools and labelled the kids scumbags and losers, just as objectionable as Matt laying into private schools and calling the kids filth.

The point I have been trying to make all the way through is that they are all just people, some with more intelligence, some with more money, some with more artistic talent, some with love and gentleness - the whole gamut of human endeavor. We should not judge and put labels onto people just because of what school they went to.

I was using the scholarship thing to counter Matt's arguement that all the kids are wealthy scum with their foot on the neck of the downtrodden but glorious underclass.

jenni
17-12-2004, 11:58 AM
To to that, he would have to bit, chew, swollow and spew. I think you mean "sic". ;)

Freudian slip - probably because of what you make me feel......

PHAT
17-12-2004, 12:02 PM
...and kids from very dysfunctional families. It had its good side, as the kids grew up with friends from a range of backgrounds ...

The many Catholic schools do take "hard cases". But the top dollar privates do not.
[quote]However I used to do a lot of help in the classroom stuff - particularly reading.

Score a 1000 points Jenni.


Also I used to teach them to sound out words - very out of fashion at that time That kind of good teaching never went out of fashion with good teachers.


Anyway the classrooms were just a shambles - the teachers spent more time trying to discipline kids and just creating enough quiet, so that they could teach.

You should try the high schools, It's kindy with sex hormones on tap.


So when I was making my choices for high school, I chose an environemnt where my kids could learn...

Us too.

... and every parent would do the same.

No, they don't - some because they are FILTH, but most because they can't (or don't) afford it.

PHAT
17-12-2004, 12:04 PM
Try: Going back to pre-school. :hand:

PHAT
17-12-2004, 12:11 PM
Thats two things you have over the neanderthal from the Gong.

Nobody invited you - who are nothing but an I-spent-a-quarter-of-a-million-dollars-on-a-car-for-transport kind of person.

arosar
17-12-2004, 12:23 PM
Nobody invited you - who are nothing but an I-spent-a-quarter-of-a-million-dollars-on-a-car-for-transport kind of person.

What's wrong with owning a $250K jag?

Mate, we're all aspirationals these days. Personally I reckon Bill has poor taste. I like Beamer M3's meself.

But get this, I swear I saw a certain Oliver doing burnouts, up and down that street in front of that Arts Building at the ANU, in a canary yellow Lexus IS200.

AR

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 12:26 PM
Hmm Jag.

I prefer Honda NSX :D

But if you wanted to spent just a tad more, like almost double, then challenge stradale is the way to go.

PHAT
17-12-2004, 12:27 PM
What's wrong with owning a $250K jag?

If you don't know by now, you never will.


Mate, we're all aspirationals these days.

Speak for yourself.

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 12:28 PM
Oh, and if you just want pure speed, then you can either get a Westfield XTR2 (1300cc 4 cyl; 0-100 in 3 sec flat; Just 50K and you can even build it in your own garage), or perhaps a done up (with 100K) Supra (quarter mile in < 10 sec).

PHAT
17-12-2004, 12:39 PM
What is wrong with all you poorly endowered vulargarians.

New and/or expensive cars are for wannabes. Older and rarer cars are th mark of natural style, as opposed to bought style.

The difference between an old VW and those new VW-like things is like the difference between an evening out with good freinds and an evening in with a call-girl.

jenni
17-12-2004, 01:45 PM
a certain Oliver doing burnouts, up and down that street in front of that Arts Building at the ANU, in a canary yellow Lexus IS200.

AR

Nope it was a pretty cheap and nasty Mazda 6 (but definitely yellow - I like bright colours. )

PHAT
17-12-2004, 01:52 PM
... pretty cheap and nasty Mazda 6 ...

A pretty cheap and nasty ploy to try and show that you can slum it as well as anyone.

arosar
17-12-2004, 01:56 PM
You're pretty <edit> noisy today y'know that? You got a day-off or something? You're mouth's like a bloody chook's ass. It's always going "putak...putak...putak...pfft...pfft...pfft"

AR

Rincewind
17-12-2004, 02:03 PM
You're pretty <edit> noisy today y'know that? You got a day-off or something? You're mouth's like a bloody chook's ass. It's always going "putak...putak...putak...pfft...pfft...pfft"

Warning #2

arosar
17-12-2004, 02:09 PM
Warning #2

Bull! What for?? That's a dumb rule.

AR

Bill Gletsos
17-12-2004, 02:34 PM
Nobody invited you - who are nothing but an I-spent-a-quarter-of-a-million-dollars-on-a-car-for-transport kind of person.
I paid for it with my own money, not someone elses.
I also pay more tax than you so I suspect my contribution to the unwashed masses as you put it is greater than yours.

Bill Gletsos
17-12-2004, 02:38 PM
If you don't know by now, you never will.

Speak for yourself.
Well its abundantly clear you aspire to nothing
You are anti achievement.
You continually demonstrate you are all for tearing people down.

arosar
17-12-2004, 02:55 PM
Righto . . . I'm off early for some Xmas drinks. Besides, this effing bastard Bazza's got me into a bad mood already with his stupid, ABSOLUTELY NO F-WORD rule.

See youse boys and girl.

AR

Rincewind
17-12-2004, 02:58 PM
Righto . . . I'm off early for some Xmas drinks. Besides, this effing bastard Bazza's got me into a bad mood already with his stupid, ABSOLUTELY NO F-WORD rule.

Have a good one.

Rhubarb
17-12-2004, 05:50 PM
Have a cigarette.Only if you promise to come watch a game of cricket with me next time you're in Sydney.

Bill Gletsos
17-12-2004, 06:21 PM
Hmm Jag.

I prefer Honda NSX :D
The Jag has it over the NSX with 0-100 in 5.3 compared to 5.9 secs. ;)

skip to my lou
17-12-2004, 09:44 PM
The Jag has it over the NSX with 0-100 in 5.3 compared to 5.9 secs. ;)

Not just speed, NSX handling is supposed to be superb, according to Clarkson :uhoh:

2002 NSX does 0-60Mph in 4.8 and quarter mile in 13.something.

Bill Gletsos
17-12-2004, 11:15 PM
Not just speed, NSX handling is supposed to be superb, according to Clarkson :uhoh:

2002 NSX does 0-60Mph in 4.8 and quarter mile in 13.something.
I was listing the specs from carpoint which I believe are manufacturer specs.
The 2002 NSX does 0-100km/h in 5.9.
The 2003 Supercharged XJ Jag does it in 5.3.

If course the new Bentley Continental does 0- 100 in 4.8 with a top speed of 318km/hr. Even more impressive when you realise the car weighs 2,410kg. Unfortunately its a little more expensive at $385k + on road costs.

JGB
17-12-2004, 11:43 PM
I was listing the specs from carpoint which I believe are manufacturer specs.
The 2002 NSX does 0-100km/h in 5.9.
The 2003 Supercharged XJ Jag does it in 5.3.

If course the new Bentley Continental does 0- 100 in 4.8 with a top speed of 318km/hr. Even more impressive when you realise the car weighs 2,410kg. Unfortunately its a little more expensive at $385k + on road costs.

The Bentley must have a 'flux capacitor'? :D It must guzzle the fuel. I wonder what a car weighing 2 and half ton drinks running at over 300kmh.

Garvinator
17-12-2004, 11:46 PM
The Bentley must have a 'flux capacitor'? :D
if it has a flux capacitor, i wanna see it do 90mph ;)

JGB
17-12-2004, 11:53 PM
if it has a flux capacitor, i wanna see it do 90mph ;)
back...back to the future. ;)
stop the thread jumping Gray! :D, its your move in our game anyway.

Garvinator
17-12-2004, 11:57 PM
back...back to the future. ;)
stop the thread jumping Gray! :D, its your move in our game anyway.
i wanna think in this position ;) you have taken your time on a couple of moves, so its my turn :D

JGB
18-12-2004, 12:06 AM
i wanna think in this position ;) you have taken your time on a couple of moves, so its my turn :D

hmmmm... :eh: . So you have made the last couple of moves without taking your time, they seem pretty precise regarding this fact. :doh: ;)

skip to my lou
18-12-2004, 12:06 AM
I was listing the specs from carpoint which I believe are manufacturer specs.
The 2002 NSX does 0-100km/h in 5.9.
The 2003 Supercharged XJ Jag does it in 5.3.

If course the new Bentley Continental does 0- 100 in 4.8 with a top speed of 318km/hr. Even more impressive when you realise the car weighs 2,410kg. Unfortunately its a little more expensive at $385k + on road costs.
Couldn't find anything listed on acura site. 4.8 is 0-60mph recorded by TopGear (or maybe FifthGear), I think. Keep in mind NSX is only V6 3 or 3.5L.

Anyhow, the done up 93 Supra on the Fast and the Furious recorded 4.7 0-100.

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2004, 12:18 AM
Couldn't find anything listed on acura site. 4.8 is 0-60mph recorded by TopGear (or maybe FifthGear), I think. Keep in mind NSX is only V6 3 or 3.5L.
Yeah its only a 3 lt. It weighs 1390kg.
The Jag is a 4.2 lt supercharged V8 and weighs 1665kg.
The Bentley is a 6.0 lt twin turbocharged 12 cylinder.

Trent Parker
18-12-2004, 01:10 AM
Hmm Jag.

I prefer Honda NSX :D

But if you wanted to spent just a tad more, like almost double, then challenge stradale is the way to go.

I prefer Public Transport.

Thats all i can use............. Legally :evil:

skip to my lou
18-12-2004, 01:16 AM
I prefer Public Transport.

Thats all i can use............. Legally :evil:

Why?

Trent Parker
18-12-2004, 01:20 AM
Why?

My eye sight is no good.

PHAT
18-12-2004, 06:15 AM
Only if you promise to come watch a game of cricket with me next time you're in Sydney.

Ummm, errr, geez, I am tempted.


BTW, I have a vague recollection of lampooning cricket watchers, on the cricket thread. It was apparently so accurite that it was deleted. Could you remind me of what I said.

PHAT
18-12-2004, 06:20 AM
It must guzzle the fuel. I wonder what a car weighing 2 and half ton drinks running at over 300kmh.

You must have failed physics at school.

The mass of the vehicle will have only a small effect (friction of road contact) on fuel consumption at constant velocity. :rolleyes:


EDIT: oops, I didn't mean to flame you - I thought it was BG who said it. I am sure you were just joking about and you did quite well at physics. :lol:

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2004, 01:53 PM
Ummm, errr, geez, I am tempted.


BTW, I have a vague recollection of lampooning cricket watchers, on the cricket thread. It was apparently so accurite that it was deleted. Could you remind me of what I said.
You didnt lampoon them at all.
You just used foul language.

Bill Gletsos
18-12-2004, 02:20 PM
EDIT: oops, I didn't mean to flame you - I thought it was BG who said it.
Well once again we can see your powers of observation are wanting.