PDA

View Full Version : Who Is Chesslover (split from Best Posts 2003)



Pages : [1] 2 3

Paul S
25-03-2004, 08:31 PM
PaulS is a nice and decent man.

His idea for the best post 2003 was great. I supported it then and I support it now.

What PaulS did was great for Australian chess and for this BB

Thank you Paul. Dont listen to idiots who detract from your great idea and make a huge fuss about $50.

Well done PaulS :clap: :clap: :clap:

Thankyou, Jose.

Your support on this issue is welcome. :)

I don't know what to make of you, sometimes you are fully in favour of my views and sometimes you are totally against.

Hope you and Arosar have a good time at the Doeberl - you both have a lot in common, so you should get on OK sharing accommodation together.

Glad to see that you don't have a grudge against me for kicking you out of the St George Summer Open.

Cheers.

chesslover
25-03-2004, 08:56 PM
Thankyou, Jose.

Your support on this issue is welcome. :)

I don't know what to make of you, sometimes you are fully in favour of my views and sometimes you are totally against.

Hope you and Arosar have a good time at the Doeberl - you both have a lot in common, so you should get on OK sharing accommodation together.

Glad to see that you don't have a grudge against me for kicking you out of the St George Summer Open.

Cheers.
I am not Jose

Previously I have been accused by many people of being a lot of other people. I have neither confirmed or denied it and have laughed at how wrong the people were.

However I am not Jose and I want the people to know this. I know Jose very well and he is a nice and wonderful young man who is often misunderstood by others.He is a geniuinly warm hearted and helpful person and I can vouch for that personally.

I am a big fan of this young man and think his passion and commitment to chess is admirable and praiseworthy. If more people like Jose existed Australian chess would be a better place. His IQ puts him among the top quartile of the population as well.

Jose lives life to the fullest and is passionate about everything that he does. This includes chess as well and has been unfairly vilified and attacked by DOPs for this passion.

The huge jealousy that was generated when I try to qualify for the FIDE world KO and the way Jose was subject to such scrutiny by a lot of people was unbelievable. No one else in AUstralia would have been subject to such jealousy and scrutiny and I know that if he appealed he would be not guilty. But Jose is too much of a gentleman to fight to the low gutter level of others in ACF and FIDE.

I am not Jose but am proud to state that I am a close friend of his and admire his talent and passion and the way he combines chess and study and his other interests. A couple of times I have said that he should run for the NSWCA president but he is too busy to do that. Maybe later he might run and we in NSW will benefit from his vision and passion.

I have said my piece but want everyone to know that I am not Jose and have never ever been Jose. I am someone else entirely

Paul S
25-03-2004, 09:07 PM
I am not Jose

Previously I have been accused by many people of being a lot of other people. I have neither confirmed or denied it and have laughed at how wrong the people were.

However I am not Jose and I want the people to know this. I know Jose very well and he is a nice and wonderful young man who is often misunderstood by others.He is a geniuinly warm hearted and helpful person and I can vouch for that personally.

I am a big fan of this young man and think his passion and commitment to chess is admirable and praiseworthy. If more people like Jose existed Australian chess would be a better place. His IQ puts him among the top quartile of the population as well.

Jose lives life to the fullest and is passionate about everything that he does. This includes chess as well and has been unfairly vilified and attacked by DOPs for this passion.

The huge jealousy that was generated when I try to qualify for the FIDE world KO and the way Jose was subject to such scrutiny by a lot of people was unbelievable. No one else in AUstralia would have been subject to such jealousy and scrutiny and I know that if he appealed he would be not guilty. But Jose is too much of a gentleman to fight to the low gutter level of others in ACF and FIDE.

I am not Jose but am proud to state that I am a close friend of his and admire his talent and passion and the way he combines chess and study and his other interests. A couple of times I have said that he should run for the NSWCA president but he is too busy to do that. Maybe later he might run and we in NSW will benefit from his vision and passion.

I have said my piece but want everyone to know that I am not Jose and have never ever been Jose. I am someone else entirely

Chesslover, I accept your word that you are NOT Jose Escribano and I apologise. :oops: :oops: :oops:

Its just that a lot of your posts seem like something that Jose would say, and so I thought I would "pop the question" on this BB as to whether or not you were him. I thought there was a 50-50 chance that you were him, but obviously I was mistaken!

My experiences of Jose are considerably different to yours, and therefore my opinion of him is considerably different to yours! I guess we will have to "agree to disagree" on Mr Escribano!

chesslover
25-03-2004, 09:31 PM
Chesslover, I accept your word that you are NOT jose Escribano and I apologise. :oops: :oops: :oops:

Its just that a lot of your posts seem like something that Jose would say, and so I thought I would "pop the question" on this BB as to whether or not you were him. I thought there was a 50-50 chance that you were him, but obviously I was mistaken!

My experiences of Jose are considerably different to yours, and therefore my opinion of him is considerably different to yours! I guess we will have to "agree to disagree" on Mr Escribano!

that is fine. no hard feelings. I spend some time with Jose so it is no surprise that sometimes I may say things that Jose says.

You are doing a great job and I admire and appreciate what you have done for chess - except for that incident in the Summer Open. However let bygones be bygones and let us start again

Your idea for the best post 2003 was a good idea and if Amiel had voted properly then instead of coming second I would have come first. As a science oriented man I would have given my prize to the3 website. Don't let others intimidate you and I look forward to the best post 2004 contest

Good luck with everything paul

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 10:53 PM
The huge jealousy that was generated when I try to qualify for the FIDE world KO and the way Jose was subject to such scrutiny by a lot of people was unbelievable.
Hmm, is that a freudian slip.
That statements says "when I try to qualify for the FIDE world KO".
So it appears that not only did Jose attempt to qualify for the FIDE world KO but so did you.
What an amazing co-incidence. :whistle:

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 10:54 PM
My experiences of Jose are considerably different to yours, and therefore my opinion of him is considerably different to yours!
I think the majority of players would have the same opinion as you Paul.

Rhubarb
25-03-2004, 10:58 PM
I am not Jose

Previously I have been accused by many people of being a lot of other people. I have neither confirmed or denied it and have laughed at how wrong the people were.

However I am not Jose and I want the people to know this. I know Jose very well and he is a nice and wonderful young man who is often misunderstood by others.He is a geniuinly warm hearted and helpful person and I can vouch for that personally.

I am a big fan of this young man and think his passion and commitment to chess is admirable and praiseworthy. If more people like Jose existed Australian chess would be a better place. His IQ puts him among the top quartile of the population as well.

Jose lives life to the fullest and is passionate about everything that he does. This includes chess as well and has been unfairly vilified and attacked by DOPs for this passion.

The huge jealousy that was generated when I try to qualify for the FIDE world KO and the way Jose was subject to such scrutiny by a lot of people was unbelievable. No one else in AUstralia would have been subject to such jealousy and scrutiny and I know that if he appealed he would be not guilty. But Jose is too much of a gentleman to fight to the low gutter level of others in ACF and FIDE.

I am not Jose but am proud to state that I am a close friend of his and admire his talent and passion and the way he combines chess and study and his other interests. A couple of times I have said that he should run for the NSWCA president but he is too busy to do that. Maybe later he might run and we in NSW will benefit from his vision and passion.

I have said my piece but want everyone to know that I am not Jose and have never ever been Jose. I am someone else entirely

BWWWAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAhaha hahahhaaaaaaahhhaaaa...........

Forget Best Post of The Year. This is a hands-down certainty for Funniest Post of The Year.

I knew you were full of shit Jose/chesslover, I just had no idea of the extent of it.

P.S. Your IQ can't be that high as you have no idea what the word quartile means.

Kevin Bonham
25-03-2004, 11:07 PM
I have never taken the Escribano=CL theory seriously before because CL simply doesn't seem quite eccentric enough to be the great Jose. Though after the debacle with CL's "friend" and his boss, where the "friend" turned out to be CL himself, I don't think CL could make a more concerted effort to convince us that he is Jose if he tried.

What I can't figure out is whether CL is trying to troll Bill, the other way around, or both.

[EDIT: fixed embarrasing stuff-up, did anyone see it before I fixed it?]

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 11:09 PM
BWWWAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAhaha hahahhaaaaaaahhhaaaa...........

Forget Best Post of The Year. This is a hands-down certainty for Funniest Post of The Year.

I knew you were full of shit Jose/chesslover, I just had no idea of the extent of it.

P.S. Your IQ can't be that high as you have no idea what the word quartile means.
Yes, I was going to ask how CL knows what Jose's IQ is.
And being in the top quartile isnt exceptional.

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 11:11 PM
What I can't figure out is whether CL is trying to troll Bill, the other way around, or both.
Prior to CL's freudian slip above, I have never suggested nor implied that CL was Jose.

Rhubarb
25-03-2004, 11:16 PM
I have never taken the Escribano=CL theory seriously before because CL simply doesn't seem quite eccentric enough to be the great Jose. Though after the debacle with CL's "friend" and his boss, where the "friend" turned out to be CL himself, I don't think CL could make a more concerted effort to convince us that he is Jose if he tried.

What I can't figure out is whether CL is trying to troll Bill, the other way around, or both.

[EDIT: fixed embarrasing stuff-up, did anyone see it before I fixed it?]

Yes saw it Kevin, but I knew what you meant.

Escribano=CL. This is now extremely obvious. (Unless chesslover is a gimp in Jose's basement. :p )

Kevin Bonham
25-03-2004, 11:16 PM
Prior to CL's freudian slip above, I have never suggested nor implied that CL was Jose.

Acknowledged. I wondered from your post whether you were now convinced he was Jose, or not convinced and stirring him to see if he could extricate himself. :lol:

My word, if he is Jose, he deserves top marks for keeping it hidden so long until being sunk by a lucky hit. :clap:

Rincewind
25-03-2004, 11:22 PM
Escribano=CL. This is now extremely obvious. (Unless chesslover is a gimp in Jose's basement. :p )

Well if he is, Jose's gonna have to wake him up. :D

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 11:26 PM
Acknowledged. I wondered from your post whether you were now convinced he was Jose, or not convinced and stirring him to see if he could extricate himself. :lol:
Lets just say, Im interested to see how this develops and particularly interested in seeing CL's explanation for his apparent fingerfehler when he used "I" instead of "he". :hmm:
After all thats no simple typing error. :whistle:


My word, if he is Jose, he deserves top marks for keeping it hidden so long until being sunk by a lucky hit. :clap:
Of course, if people are going to lose their anonimity, I think its generally going to be due to some error on their part, rather than magnificent sleuthing by a detective.

Rhubarb
25-03-2004, 11:36 PM
Yes, I was going to ask how CL knows what Jose's IQ is.
And being in the top quartile isnt exceptional.

Yeah, at first I thought he must have meant top percentile rather than quartile, but then I realised that percentile would almost certainly not apply in this case. :)

Kevin Bonham
25-03-2004, 11:37 PM
Lets just say, Im interested to see how this develops and particularly interested in seeing CL's explanation for his apparent fingerfehler when he used "I" instead of "he". :hmm:
After all thats no simple typing error. :whistle:

He certainly has some explaining to do. I suppose the next questions should be: does what we know about CL from his past posts (none of which we have any reason to doubt) tally with what is known about Escribano? E.G. Is Escribano from Eastern Europe, is he married, does he work, does he buy chess books, is his age in the right range, has Matthew (I think it was he said he'd played) played him in tournaments?

Or is this all just a wild goose chase? :lol:

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 11:45 PM
Yeah, at first I thought he must have meant top percentile rather than quartile, but then I realised that percentile would almost certainly not apply in this case. :)
Yes, top quartile is anywhere above about 111.

As for the top percentile even I'm not in that, although I'm close. :lol: :whistle:

Garvinator
25-03-2004, 11:49 PM
and even if you have a really high iq, you can still be an idiot and a goose :doh: sometimes even at the same time ;)

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 11:49 PM
He certainly has some explaining to do. I suppose the next questions should be: does what we know about CL from his past posts (none of which we have any reason to doubt) tally with what is known about Escribano? E.G. Is Escribano from Eastern Europe, is he married, does he work, does he buy chess books, is his age in the right range, has Matthew (I think it was he said he'd played) played him in tournaments?
Lets just say that Jose is in the right age bracket. Also he has mentioned that he played Matt once.


Or is this all just a wild goose chase? :lol:
I think goose season is better than duck or rabbit season. :lol:

Bill Gletsos
25-03-2004, 11:52 PM
and even if you have a really high iq, you can still be an idiot and a goose :doh: sometimes even at the same time ;)
True, a high IQ doesnt mean you are smart all the time or have common sense. Likewise an average IQ doesnt mean you cant be a clever goose. :whistle:

eclectic
25-03-2004, 11:54 PM
there's no chance, is there, that this "outing?" might cause a mysterious, serious server "outage" ?

eclectic

Paul S
26-03-2004, 12:02 AM
Hmm, this is all very interesting. I'll be interested to see how this thread pans out, and what Chesslover has to say................


He certainly has some explaining to do. I suppose the next questions should be: does what we know about CL from his past posts (none of which we have any reason to doubt) tally with what is known about Escribano? E.G. Is Escribano from Eastern Europe, is he married, does he work, does he buy chess books, is his age in the right range, has Matthew (I think it was he said he'd played) played him in tournaments?


One possibility is that some of these "clues" may be in fact "red herrings", designed to put people off the scent as far as finding out Chesslover's identity is concerned.


Or is this all just a wild goose chase? :lol:

Could be! :lol:

PHAT
26-03-2004, 12:10 AM
More clues:

1. His Mrs is from SE Asia and brought her child with her to Australia.
2. On the long time ago original BB, CL was using his real name.

Of course, these two clues may also be red herrings.

3. CL went "missing" - he said, to the USA - a while back. Did Jose "stop playing" in his absence?

Sam Spade. Youy are a sluth wanna be. Hop to it.

eclectic
26-03-2004, 12:14 AM
More clues:

1. His Mrs is from SE Asia and brought her child with her to Australia.
2. On the long time ago original BB, CL was using his real name.

Of course, these may also be red herrings.
it's like a le carre spy novel ... with the chief of station ... aka supreme emperor of all ... being a double agent

:hand:

eclectic

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 12:16 AM
More clues:

1. His Mrs is from SE Asia and brought her child with her to Australia.
2. On the long time ago original BB, CL was using his real name.

Of course, these two clues may also be red herrings.

3. CL went "missing" - he said, to the USA - a while back. Did Jose "stop playing" in his absence?

Sam Spade. Youy are a sluth wanna be. Hop to it.
He also mentioned on the old BB at one stage that his rating was in the 1600's.
He has also mentioned that he and Paul S have met at Canterbury.

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 12:21 AM
He also mentioned on the old BB at one stage that his rating was in the 1600's.
has joses ever been in this mentioned range ;) a rating officer should be able to find that out :lol: :whistle: :clap:

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 12:30 AM
has joses ever been in this mentioned range ;) a rating officer should be able to find that out :lol: :whistle: :clap:
Now why didn't I think of that. :whistle:

Alan Shore
26-03-2004, 12:47 AM
Hehe, I like a good mystery.. I might add though, it's possible the 'rating in the 1600's' was fabricated, but I remember Jose's rating being in the 1500's a couple of years ago, if that's how far back you were thinking, so close enough. Another point you can consider is that CL is quite religious and won't play chess on the easter sunday. Personally, from what I know of Jose, he can be quite passionate about things, even agro, but also be a good bloke at the end of it, sounds quite like CL to me too.

After you've solved this one, you can do me next :p

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 12:54 AM
After you've solved this one, you can do me next :p
nah, i would rather try and work where your latest pm reply has gotten too

Alan Shore
26-03-2004, 01:07 AM
nah, i would rather try and work where your latest pm reply has gotten too

Oh, well, I wasn't sure what else to say.. We kind of established a common point but neither of us really came up with a solution? Did you want to make the concerns public about Mr ****** or just talk to a few people first? Your call.

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 01:11 AM
Oh, well, I wasn't sure what else to say.. We kind of established a common point but neither of us really came up with a solution? Did you want to make the concerns public about Mr ****** or just talk to a few people first? Your call.
have replied via pm

Rhubarb
26-03-2004, 01:18 AM
Well there is no doubt in my mind that chesslover is Escribano. As soon as Paul S mentioned Jose in a previous post, I was certain, in fact I couldn't believe it hadn't occurred to me before.

I think the red herrings theory is reading too much into it. Escribano just forgot to change "I" to "Jose" in that truly ludicrous post a couple of pages back.

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 01:46 AM
Well there is no doubt in my mind that chesslover is Escribano. As soon as Paul S mentioned Jose in a previous post, I was certain, in fact I couldn't believe it hadn't occurred to me before.

I think the red herrings theory is reading too much into it. Escribano just forgot to change "I" to "Jose" in that truly ludicrous post a couple of pages back.
Well CL has stayed he has played Milan Grcic from the ACT a number of times in NSW events. CL has also stated that he has played AR a number of times and their score is even.

chesslover
26-03-2004, 07:41 AM
Now why didn't I think of that. :whistle:

You CANNOT do that

This is confidential information and if you are doing that you are ABUSING your position as a rating officer to find out confidential information about me.

That si not fair and unethical and I want you to stop that

arosar
26-03-2004, 07:56 AM
This is soo hilarious! Sucked in again.

I can tell you blokes chesslover is most definitely not Jose.

AR

chesslover
26-03-2004, 07:56 AM
This is DEFAMATORY by trying to say I am Jose

I am not Jose and Jose is not me. I know him and he is a great bloke but he is not me. If you continue like this he may even sue you fro defamation so discontinue with this line. I want moderators to take heavy action to stop this defamation of me

I do not want to say who I am for people then judge me without any reason. I have been victimised a lot by people in the chess scene but yet I play on. In tournaments i know that DOPs watch me and have disrespected all the complaints that I have raised which are legitimate. Sometimes when I have complained about the noise level the DOP has kicked me out. Is that fair or just. The DOP should not abuse his power by kicking oput people for making legitimate complaints. In other tournaments I have been watched and made victimised and they are trying to hound me out of chess.

I even was subject of a very nsty and evil comment by the organiser of the most prestigeous tournament in Australia. i overheard him say nasty and defamatory things about me when I was playing and wrote a formal appeal to the DOP. The DOP hates me and I only got a little satisfaction. I could have destroyed the organiser by letting the Australian Chess Federation know about his remark and appealing DOP's decision but that will mean that this prestigeous weekender will nbot be held this year as the organiser will be disciplined. I decided not to go ahead with this appeal for the good of Australian chess and have even decided to give them another chance.

This shows that i have the interest of chess and I do not want people to make fun of me. I may want to be a professional chess player in the future and my aim is to be a IM at least. That is why I have to protect my identity.
If I reveal myself I will be even more of a target to the chess powers who already hate me.

So respect my annonymousity and leave me alone. This is defamatory

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 07:57 AM
You CANNOT do that

This is confidential information and if you are doing that you are ABUSING your position as a rating officer to find out confidential information about me.

That si not fair and unethical and I want you to stop that

CL
Could you expand on this a bit? From what I see, a) you enter tournaments knowing that the results will be public, and b) you drop hints on th BB about who you have played. Seems like an open invitation to Bill to put 'to and too' together. I can't see any information to which 'privacy' principles apply.
starter

chesslover
26-03-2004, 07:57 AM
This is soo hilarious! Sucked in again.

I can tell you blokes chesslover is most definitely not Jose.

AR

thank you amiel

I am not Jose and even pauls said that too

People are barking up the wrong tree

chesslover
26-03-2004, 08:00 AM
CL
Could you expand on this a bit? From what I see, a) you enter tournaments knowing that the results will be public, and b) you drop hints on th BB about who you have played. Seems like an open invitation to Bill to put 'to and too' together. I can't see any information to which 'privacy' principles apply.
starter

as rating officer Bill should not do that. If he does he is using information to find out who I am and I will sue him and the ACF if he does that :mad: :mad:

Bill should consider this a formal and official warning from me.

I think this is getting defamatory and the topic should be locked. Innocent people are being blamed and defamed

Moderator can you take action

chesslover
26-03-2004, 08:05 AM
Well there is no doubt in my mind that chesslover is Escribano. As soon as Paul S mentioned Jose in a previous post, I was certain, in fact I couldn't believe it hadn't occurred to me before.

I think the red herrings theory is reading too much into it. Escribano just forgot to change "I" to "Jose" in that truly ludicrous post a couple of pages back.

you know nothing :mad: :mad: :mad:

just concentrate on staying sober and playing chess instead of being defamatory :mad: :mad: :mad:

chesslover
26-03-2004, 08:11 AM
Lets just say, Im interested to see how this develops and particularly interested in seeing CL's explanation for his apparent fingerfehler when he used "I" instead of "he". :hmm:
After all thats no simple typing error. :whistle:


Of course, if people are going to lose their anonimity, I think its generally going to be due to some error on their part, rather than magnificent sleuthing by a detective.

Stick to fixing up your flawed rating system :mad: :mad: :mad:

It was just a simple typing "mistake". Since you have made so many mistakes this should not be strange to you.

I am not Jose and am someone else. People are being very evil and mischeivous and they should stop it :mad: :mad:

Otherwise the BB will get sued and chess in australia will be bankrupt

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 08:22 AM
This is soo hilarious! Sucked in again.

I can tell you blokes chesslover is most definitely not Jose.

AR
Could you be more specific AR? Just who has been sucked in?
Bill's posts don't actually say anything other than a very observant note on 'I' and 'Jose'. So, I don't think Bill has declared himself. And Matt........well I get the smell of red herrings.

It would be amusing if Bill and Matt were on CL's side. :eek: But then I am just a Southerner. What would I know. :doh:
starter

arosar
26-03-2004, 08:26 AM
CL, just calm down man....

AR

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 08:32 AM
You CANNOT do that

This is confidential information and if you are doing that you are ABUSING your position as a rating officer to find out confidential information about me.

That si not fair and unethical and I want you to stop that
Try and not be such a goose you goose.
You dont need to be the ratings officer to do what gg suggested.
Anyone can do it because the rating lists are published on the ACF web site.

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 08:33 AM
Could you be more specific AR? Just who has been sucked in?
Bill's posts don't actually say anything other than a very observant note on 'I' and 'Jose'.
Exactly starter.

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 08:46 AM
Try and not be such a goose you goose.
You dont need to be the ratings officer to do what gg suggested.
Anyone can do it because the rating lists are published on the ACF web site.
Like i just did, jose has a rating of 1573 according to the nswca website from the city of sydney championships 2004. but i guess the acf and now the rating officers are corrupt again :whistle:

Cl, i dont know if you are jose or not, i dont really care actually as i dont know who jose is, but dont make me go geese hunting again :mad: . think of poor old starter, if you keep making me go geese hunting, our poor old starter cant catch up ;) :lol:

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 08:57 AM
Like i just did, jose has a rating of 1573 according to the nswca website from the city of sydney championships 2004. but i guess the acf and now the rating officers are corrupt again :whistle:

Cl, i dont know if you are jose or not, i dont really care actually as i dont know who jose is, but dont make me go geese hunting again :mad: . think of poor old starter, if you keep making me go geese hunting, our poor old starter cant catch up ;) :lol:

Where is Jeo when you want him. :hmm:

He made the posts on the non-chess thread not add to the post-count-register. He would have been better advised putting in an AI-script to measure the intrinsic worth of your counts gg''. My guess is that many would have been screened from being judged as value-adding.
gg'', don't you know when to :hand: .

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 08:59 AM
Where is Jeo when you want him. :hmm:

He made the posts on the non-chess thread not add to the post-count-register. He would have been better advised putting in an AI-script to measure the intrinsic worth of your counts gg''. My guess is that many would have been screened from being judged as value-adding.
gg'', don't you know when to :hand: .
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: ;) if ppls post counts on here were by value, then i am sure all of us would be counting our posts on our fingers and toes :whistle: :lol:

Alan Shore
26-03-2004, 11:22 AM
Why is it whenever things are just starting to get interesting people want moderators to intervene? I say no intervention - we all have the right to our say.

I don't know why CL got so upset.. I didn't see anything defamatory said about him, and as far as I know everyone was still in the hypothesising stage about his identity.

arosar
26-03-2004, 11:35 AM
CL is the BB's biggest enigma. The best troll. Master of hyperbole and sensationalism. I say, congrats to him.

I, for one, hope that he will always remain a secret identity. Otherwise, that'll surely kill off all the fun.

AR

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 11:47 AM
Why is it whenever things are just starting to get interesting people want moderators to intervene? I say no intervention - we all have the right to our say.

I don't know why CL got so upset.. I didn't see anything defamatory said about him, and as far as I know everyone was still in the hypothesising stage about his identity.

Bruce

K. is not a moderator.
I have defended everyones right to have a say Bruce.
I just don't think that gg'' 's should count. :uhoh:

starter

Alan Shore
26-03-2004, 12:03 PM
I use the term 'moderator' quite liberally, you can take it to encompass administrator as well.

It's.. curious.. you care so much about a post count on a BB.. I'd personally suggest some more useful goals for one's life :p Maybe you can ask Jeo to reset everyone's posts to zero, or to just do away with the counts altogether. But for now I don't think you can do anything about GG's posting, a post is a post.

Rincewind
26-03-2004, 12:19 PM
You CANNOT do that

This is confidential information and if you are doing that you are ABUSING your position as a rating officer to find out confidential information about me.

That si not fair and unethical and I want you to stop that

My website has historical rating lists going back several years. On the question of Mr Escribano's rating ever being >1600, the obvious time to check would be soon after the 150 point uplift. Early 2000 from memory.

My collection is a little scratchy from that time but I do have a copy of the August 2000 Active player list.Quick check and, hey presto, Mr Escribano's rating was 1646.

So that would seem to answer that question.

Methinks thou doth protest too much, CL. If you are Jose Escribano then just admit and get on with your life. If you are not, then just ignore the accusations. But ludicrous threats of legal action without basis is doing yourself a disservice.

Ian Rout
26-03-2004, 12:27 PM
If CL=Jose why has CL suddenly released about five pieces of information any one of which would be sufficient to expose himself? Either

a) CL is Jose and wants to come out.

b) CL is not Jose and is trying to mislead everyone that he is Jose to protect his/her true identity.

c) CL is Jose and wants people to think (b) and so conclude that he is not.

The trouble with (b) is that it's done in such an over-the-top way rather than dropping a couple of subtle hints and letting people "solve" them. But then a similar argument could be used to reject (c) - CL would not want to make CL NE Jose so immediately dismissable, but allow people to work it out over time.

Personally I have some difficulty believing CL is Jose but I could see merit in a theory that CL is several people of who Jose could be one.

Rincewind
26-03-2004, 12:37 PM
Another point worth speculating on is CL's ardent pushing of the Laura Moylan barrow. There was speculation at the time that CL and Laura were members of the same club.

Perhaps someone with Sydney knowledge could help me out here but do Laura and Jose both frequent/represent Wests?

Could be a(nother) coincindence, of course. ;)

eclectic
26-03-2004, 12:50 PM
Another point worth speculating on is CL's ardent pushing of the Laura Moylan barrow. There was speculation at the time that CL and Laura were members of the same club.

Perhaps someone with Sydney knowledge could help me out here but do Laura and Jose both frequent/represent Wests?

Could be a(nother) coincindence, of course. ;)
i wonder if starter is looking with bemusement at all these accumulating ...

"datapoints" ? :whistle:

perhaps he has already joined the dots but knows to say nothing

:hand:

eclectic

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 01:35 PM
This is DEFAMATORY by trying to say I am Jose

I am not Jose and Jose is not me. I know him and he is a great bloke but he is not me. If you continue like this he may even sue you fro defamation so discontinue with this line. I want moderators to take heavy action to stop this defamation of me
How can it be defamatory to speculate that an unknown poster is Jose.
Are you seriously suggesting that Jose would feel that you are such a goose that being linked to you would worry Jose or is it that you would not like anyone to think you are Jose, because of other peoples opinions of Jose.


I do not want to say who I am for people then judge me without any reason. I have been victimised a lot by people in the chess scene but yet I play on. In tournaments i know that DOPs watch me and have disrespected all the complaints that I have raised which are legitimate. Sometimes when I have complained about the noise level the DOP has kicked me out. Is that fair or just. Being kicked out for complaining about noise in the NSW champs and Charles had no right to do that. The DOP should not abuse his power by kicking oput people for making legitimate complaints. In other tournaments I have been watched and made victimised and they are trying to hound me out of chess. A couple of times they will not even allow me to switch off the noise by having earphones. It is okay for people to make noise but not for me to drown out the noise by having earphones.
If all this is true it certainly helps narrow down who you are as the number of people Charles has thrown out of a State Championship is miniscule.
In fact it could be argued by providing this much information you are virtually deliberately outing yourself.


I even was subject of a very nsty and evil comment by the organiser of the most prestigeous tournament in Australia. i overheard him say nasty and defamatory things about me when I was playing and wrote a formal appeal to the DOP. The DOP hates me and I only got a little satisfaction. I could have destroyed the organiser by letting the Australian Chess Federation know about his remark and appealing charles's decision but that will mean that this prestigeous weekender will nbot be held this year as the organiser will be disciplined. I decided not to go ahead with this appeal for the good of Australian chess and have even decided to give them another chance.
One would assume you are referring to the Doeberl Cup.


This shows that i have the interest of chess and I do not want people to make fun of me. I may want to be a professional chess player in the future and my aim is to be a IM at least. That is why I have to protect my identity.
As an adult rated in the 1600's, I think the ooportunities for you to reach IM status are somewhere between none and buckleys.

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 01:41 PM
as rating officer Bill should not do that. If he does he is using information to find out who I am and I will sue him and the ACF if he does that :mad: :mad:

Bill should consider this a formal and official warning from me.

I think this is getting defamatory and the topic should be locked. Innocent people are being blamed and defamed

Moderator can you take action
You are a total goose.
Their is nothing private about players ratings as rating lists are published in magazines and on the web.

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 01:44 PM
Stick to fixing up your flawed rating system :mad: :mad: :mad:
What would a goose know about maths.


It was just a simple typing "mistake". Since you have made so many mistakes this should not be strange to you.
Typing mistakes are when you type like htis or mabye liek thsi.
Typing I instead of he is not a typing mistake.

Finally you moron, at no stage have I said that CL is Jose.
I have simply pointed out an anomaly in your post regarding "I" and "he".

Any other information I have posted in this thread was taken from posts you yourself made either on this or the old BB, you goose.

arosar
26-03-2004, 01:47 PM
I reckon I have the best idea for a BB prize. First to figure out who CL is wins.

AR

Bill Gletsos
26-03-2004, 01:49 PM
I reckon I have the best idea for a BB prize. First to figure out who CL is wins.

AR
Ha ha, I reckon that suggestion will get you wiped off CL's "friends" list. :whistle:

skip to my lou
26-03-2004, 01:57 PM
Ha ha, I reckon that suggestion will get you wiped off CL's "friends" list. :whistle:

CL has friends?

Rincewind
26-03-2004, 02:19 PM
You are a total goose.
Their is nothing private about players ratings as rating lists are published in magazines and on the web.

That's right and a number of players have outed themselves or their opponents by providing very specifc rating details. From memory, b72 AKA Ascaro did this as did Senore Sweeney with his hapless 1833 scalp in a recent club game. :D

Kevin Bonham
26-03-2004, 02:44 PM
This is DEFAMATORY by trying to say I am Jose

Absolute rubbish. There are two possibilities.

(i) You are Jose in which case it is the truth, and is not defamatory.
(ii) You are not Jose in which case even if being called Jose would be defamatory, it doesn't matter because no one here knows who you are. Therefore you have no personal reputation on account of your postings here and cannot be defamed. :doh:


I could have destroyed the organiser by letting the Australian Chess Federation know about his remark and appealing charles's decision but that will mean that this prestigeous weekender will nbot be held this year as the organiser will be disciplined. I decided not to go ahead with this appeal for the good of Australian chess and have even decided to give them another chance.

Actually if anything's defamatory it's probably all this stuff, although since I haven't worked out what you're referring to I'm not sure anyone else will either. Do you really reckon the ACF would ban an organiser for hosting a tournament because the organiser made a defamatory remark about a player which chanced to be overheard? Does the ACF indeed even have that power?

Kevin Bonham
26-03-2004, 02:49 PM
CL is the BB's biggest enigma. The best troll. Master of hyperbole and sensationalism. I say, congrats to him.

Yes, but I think his days of anonymity are numbered and expect someone will nut it out very soon. He does troll sometimes, but he doesn't always troll, and that will be his downfall. In this case it is now very clear to me who is trolling who.

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 03:14 PM
its interesting that the who is cl case has bobbed up in the best posts section, that is irony i think :hand: :wall: :whistle: :hmm:

Rhubarb
26-03-2004, 03:16 PM
Personally I have some difficulty believing CL is Jose but I could see merit in a theory that CL is several people of who Jose could be one.

I like this theory. Chesslover is two or more people, one of whom is Escribano.

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 03:16 PM
i wonder if starter is looking with bemusement at all these accumulating ...

"datapoints" ? :whistle:

perhaps he has already joined the dots but knows to say nothing

:hand:

eclectic

hi eclectic
How are you.
Thanks for the invitation to post on what is essentially a Sydney matter.
Now listen, I was trained by an Army Captain, see. And he said the Army always fired one long, and one short, before trying to hit the target.

So, I am thinking the answer is somewhere in between

A.....Schultz from Hogan's heroes > "I know nothing, nothing".
and
B.....Sybil from Faulty Towers> "I know, oh, I know"


Can anyone tell me if I am warm? :rolleyes:

starter

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 03:22 PM
You CANNOT do that

This is confidential information and if you are doing that you are ABUSING your position as a rating officer to find out confidential information about me.

That si not fair and unethical and I want you to stop that

going back over this post, time for some geese hunting :clap:

How can bill go and get your rating if you are not Jose? Bill would not know who to look at for their rating. The only way Bill could publish a rating that is related to the question at hand is if he publishes Jose's rating. Btw cl, if bill was to publish Joses rating on here, it would be perfectly legal as Joses rating has been published before, by me. I got it from the city of sydney championship site. So it is hardly private information.

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 03:23 PM
its interesting that the who is cl case has bobbed up in the best posts section, that is irony i think :hand: :wall: :whistle: :hmm:

Fair is fair gg''.

CL did have three people supporting him in the votes for best post. So it is entirely appropriate that the id. of CL is debated here, on this thread. And, if I am not wrong, one of those three people actually knows the true identity of CL. ;)

starter

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 03:28 PM
one of those three people actually knows the true identity of CL. ;)
claims to know :whistle:

Kevin Bonham
26-03-2004, 03:28 PM
Bill would not know who to look at for their rating.

Assuming CL is not Jose but that info he has provided before is accurate, there are ways of narrowing the field.

arosar
26-03-2004, 03:29 PM
Now listen, I was trained by an Army Captain, see. And he said the Army always fired one long, and one short, before trying to hit the target.

You were in artillery?

AR

arosar
26-03-2004, 03:52 PM
claims to know :whistle:

Who?

Are you misunderstanding again gray?

AR

Rhubarb
26-03-2004, 03:56 PM
you know nothing :mad: :mad: :mad:

just concentrate on staying sober and playing chess instead of being defamatory :mad: :mad: :mad:

Good advice Jose, I mean chesslover. Can you ask Jose if he can give me any further advice on becoming an IM? I hear that despite being a 1500-1600 player he is very close to the title and I wanted to know if he would deign to give me some tips.

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 03:58 PM
claims to know :whistle:

One by one, gg'', think through who expressed support (vote) for CL in the BB vote.

Now, do you want to correct 'claims to know'? :p :uhoh:

chesslover
26-03-2004, 04:00 PM
I want to formally lodge an official and very serious complaint about this :mad: :mad: :mad:

I have a right to being private and people should not pry into my life. If I choose to be ssecret then I should be secret. To do otherwise is a vicious violation of my right to annonymity :mad: :mad:

I have done nothing wrong and I find all this causing a lot of emotional trauma and distress and causing me health pains. I ask this specualtion to stop :mad:

I know lot of secrets as well about others. I know some sexualhistory and other misdeeds of people but I do not tell that to others as I respect their privacy. So people should also respect my privacy and my distress :mad: :mad:

I also warn people that there may be legal suing if people say I am Jose. I had chat and it may be successful so stop trying to hound me and Jose. I hope if this continues Jose sues the BB and the people here and I will be rich and chess poor :mad:

All of this specualtion and distress means that I may never post again or post far less than before. I am the number 2 poster and came second in the best post 2003 so that is no way to respect me :mad:

There are others who are annonymous. Why only pick on me? there are others who are less repcetd so pick on them. I have done nothing wrong and I ask that my annonymous right be respected. If uyou cannot be annonymous then say so and I will no longer be annonymous

There are more important things to discuss than me or Jose. Let us do that and not do illegal and offensive things that are against democracy

ursogr8
26-03-2004, 04:00 PM
You were in artillery?

AR

No. Just worked for an Army Captain when he was civilianised.

Rhubarb
26-03-2004, 04:20 PM
I want to formally lodge an official and very serious complaint about this :mad: :mad: :mad:

I have a right to being private and people should not pry into my life. If I choose to be ssecret then I should be secret. To do otherwise is a vicious violation of my right to annonymity :mad: :mad:

I have done nothing wrong and I find all this causing a lot of emotional trauma and distress and causing me health pains. I ask this specualtion to stop :mad:

I know lot of secrets as well about others. I know some sexualhistory and other misdeeds of people but I do not tell that to others as I respect their privacy. So people should also respect my privacy and my distress :mad: :mad:

I also warn people that there may be legal suing if people say I am Jose. I had chat and it may be successful so stop trying to hound me and Jose. I hope if this continues Jose sues the BB and the people here and I will be rich and chess poor :mad:

All of this specualtion and distress means that I may never post again or post far less than before. I am the number 2 poster and came second in the best post 2003 so that is no way to respect me :mad:

There are others who are annonymous. Why only pick on me? there are others who are less repcetd so pick on them. I have done nothing wrong and I ask that my annonymous right be respected. If uyou cannot be annonymous then say so and I will no longer be annonymous

There are more important things to discuss than me or Jose. Let us do that and not do illegal and offensive things that are against democracy

Look you clown, if you're not Jose why do you make everyone believe you are when you say things like you have a right to wear headphones, when everyone knows that Escribano is the only player in Sydney who regularly does that.

If it was true that you're not Escribano, Escribano should be suing you for impersonation.

Now there's a thought. Escribano successfully sues himself for all of his possessions. QCs for the plaintiff privately say the decision is a very "special" one.

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 04:24 PM
Look you clown,
greg, i think you are looking for goose, not clown :clap: the term clown already has an owner, firegoat7 ;)

Rhubarb
26-03-2004, 04:30 PM
greg, i think you are looking for goose, not clown :clap: the term clown already has an owner, firegoat7 ;)
sorry gg, i'm not yet au fait with the protocol for disparagement. :doh:

Kevin Bonham
26-03-2004, 05:02 PM
I want to formally lodge an official and very serious complaint about this

OK, your "official and very serious complaint" has been noted by this particular moderator ... and dismissed. Better luck with the others, if you want to try.


I have a right to being private and people should not pry into my life. If I choose to be ssecret then I should be secret. To do otherwise is a vicious violation of my right to annonymity

Haven't you ever heard that quote "You have no privacy. Get over it." in relation to the net? You have left info about who you are on the public record all over these forums. Assuming that info is correct then if you did not want people guessing who you are you should not have left it. :wall: :wall: :wall: It is exquisitely tiresome to have to explain this kind of thing to people over and over and over again - and especially ironic given that you were the one who dragged the NECG staff contact details into a place where I am pretty damn sure the NECG staff in question would not have wanted them posted. :rolleyes:


I have done nothing wrong and I find all this causing a lot of emotional trauma and distress and causing me health pains. I ask this specualtion to stop :mad:

Stop being such a shrinking, or should it be shrieking, violet. You brought it on yourself by posting clues. You are bringing it on yourself still more by reacting like this.


I know lot of secrets as well about others. I know some sexualhistory and other misdeeds of people but I do not tell that to others as I respect their privacy. So people should also respect my privacy and my distress

Yes but if you posted those you would be defaming specific people who are known to us by name whereas you are anonymous and therefore cannot be defamed. So if this is a threat it is an idle one.


I also warn people that there may be legal suing if people say I am Jose.

I warn you that if you say anything like this again I will have no legal alternative but to call you a g****. :hand:


I had chat and it may be successful so stop trying to hound me and Jose. I hope if this continues Jose sues the BB and the people here and I will be rich and chess poor

Jose also could not sue successfully. His reputation is hardly lowered by being accused of being you, since he is already far more infamous in Australian chess circles than you.


All of this specualtion and distress means that I may never post again or post far less than before. I am the number 2 poster and came second in the best post 2003 so that is no way to respect me

Quality does not necessarily equal quantity. :doh: (You do post a lot of good stuff, but you also post some utter rubbish of which the post I'm replying to is a prime example.) And while you did indeed come second (for a post which IMHO was fair to middling) just look where your votes came from. :lol:


There are more important things to discuss than me or Jose. Let us do that and not do illegal and offensive things that are against democracy

Against democracy? I don't recall the Australian people passing any referenda that say that speculation about a person's identity should be banned on internet fora where that person leaves clues to their identity draped over every second thread in sight. :hmm:

Alan Shore
26-03-2004, 05:03 PM
Stop being such a baby CL, it's not a good look and this isn't primary school.


There are others who are annonymous. Why only pick on me? there are others who are less repcetd so pick on them.

And just what's that supposed to mean? (I take it that jumbled word equated to 'respected'). Because you're the one losing respect here right now. Want to name any of these such people you speak of? You'd face a countersuit if you did, by your logic.

I don't know what the big deal is, unless you're so insulted by being referred to as a Jose - that's not giving Jose himself much credit according to you is it?

I've given you plenty of support in the past CL, but the time has come for you to grow up somewhat.

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 05:05 PM
sorry gg, i'm not yet au fait with the protocol for disparagement. :doh:
its alright greg, firegoat came to own the term clown after these efforts on the old bb.
http://www.chesskit.com/auschess/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=auschess;action=display;num=10702810 16;start=

it appears that his very first post has disappeared. He was more than rather critical of players from smaller states getting into the aussie champs despite not being rated above 2150.

Chess Dad
26-03-2004, 07:16 PM
So should Jose wear a badge on Sunday saying "I am Not chesslover"?

Cause its bound to be asked 100 times! :lol:

Kevin Bonham
26-03-2004, 07:22 PM
So should Jose wear a badge on Sunday saying "I am Not chesslover"?

I reckon Jose should wear a badge saying "I am NOT Jose Escribano."

Rhubarb
26-03-2004, 07:31 PM
I reckon Jose should wear a badge saying "I am NOT Jose Escribano."

:owned:

Yes, that's what I would do if I was Jose.....

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 07:33 PM
:owned:

Yes, that's what I would do if I was Jose.....
i want to know if your going to walk up to jose and ask, how are you chesslover ;)

Alan Shore
26-03-2004, 07:42 PM
Oh I can't wait, if only I was there.. please try to judge his first reaction if you ask him, I'm interested as a psychologist :)

Rhubarb
26-03-2004, 07:50 PM
Oh I can't wait, if only I was there.. please try to judge his first reaction if you ask him, I'm interested as a psychologist :)

OK, I'll try but I fear that he might be prepared by then. Someone from this forum (chesslover perhaps? :D ) might give him advanced notice.

Garvinator
26-03-2004, 08:10 PM
OK, I'll try but I fear that he might be prepared by then. Someone from this forum (chesslover perhaps? :D ) might give him advanced notice.
i wonder if jose will be dumb enough if someone walks up to him and says hello chesslover, that he responses hello or something like that :eek: :clap:

Paul S
26-03-2004, 11:51 PM
Gee, what did I start about 6 pages (and about 27 hours) ago? :hmm:

Well, I don't know what to make of it all! On the one hand it would seem that I was too quick with my apology for suggesting that Chesslover = Jose Escribano (I did not scrutinise Chesslover's reply as thorougly as what Bill and others did). Chesslover's replies (especially the ones about headphones etc) would appear to indicate that he is Jose (eg Jose is the only person I know in recent months who has had an issue with wearing of headphones).

Then again, who knows. I recall Ian Rout on a BB in 2002 (at the height of all those anonymous SEC versus Doeberl trolling posts) talking about the likelihood of double bluffs, triple bluffs and (I think) even quadruple bluffs!

I am confused. :confused:

Who is Chesslover?

Rincewind
27-03-2004, 12:01 AM
Who is Chesslover?

That's the question, isn't it. As a fund raising exercise perhaps the NSWCA should print t-shirts with a witty caption like

Would the real Jose Escribano please stand up!

I reckon it would sell more copies than the nude calendar. ;)

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 12:05 AM
That's the question, isn't it. As a fund raising exercise perhaps the NSWCA should print t-shirts with a witty caption like

Would the real Jose Escribano please stand up!

I reckon it would sell more copies than the nude calendar. ;)
shouldnt it be, would the real chesslover plz stand up ;)

Rincewind
27-03-2004, 12:11 AM
shouldnt it be, would the real chesslover plz stand up ;)
Sorry, typo. ;)

Rhubarb
27-03-2004, 12:32 AM
Scenes we'd like to see:

Jose and chesslover get into fisticuffs at the Doeberl Cup. I think Jose would stand a real chance of winning that one. :)

eclectic
27-03-2004, 02:38 AM
Scenes we'd like to see:

Jose and chesslover get into fisticuffs at the Doeberl Cup. I think Jose would stand a real chance of winning that one. :)
will their battle merely rage on internally though ?

is it a case of

dissociative cyber-identity disorder ?

:hmm:

eclectic

ps

doesn't some other clown has exclusive rights to stage doeberl fisticuffs ? :whistle:

chesslover
27-03-2004, 08:29 AM
I can assure you that I am not Jose. Even Amiel who knows Jose can say that I am not him.

I fund it sad and a bad reflection on australian chess that this topic has dominated the BB yesterday. No wonder chess is doomed when concentrate on finding out if I am someone that they think I am

From now on I will not post without thinking and saying teh first thing I will think of. I will post less and also think and reread what I type before posting. There will be no more clues in my posts that will indicate who I am. I hope people are happy about ruining me and Joseand for causing him a lot of stress and agitation.

Tommorrow I hope Jose issues legal writs against people who call him me. He and I are 2 seperate being. If he was me do you think he would say these things that willidentify himas me? he is smarter than that.

So let us stop these bad speculation and discuss chess. That is what this is all about about

Do people know karthich is now Tian? :eek: why dont you talk about that?

PHAT
27-03-2004, 08:54 AM
CL, maaate. Help me help Jose. Save me some research time and tell me your leave and return dates for when you went over seas - I think it was last year sometime.

Rincewind
27-03-2004, 09:03 AM
I can assure you that I am not Jose. Even Amiel who knows Jose can say that I am not him.

Interesting philosophical problem. You can prove that you are someone. Very difficult to prove that you are NOT someone. So I people believe you are Jose, then (in there minds at least) you are.


From now on I will not post without thinking and saying teh first thing I will think of. I will post less and also think and reread what I type before posting. There will be no more clues in my posts that will indicate who I am. I hope people are happy about ruining me and Joseand for causing him a lot of stress and agitation.

Well there is a positive, thinking before you post. ;)


Tommorrow I hope Jose issues legal writs against people who call him me. He and I are 2 seperate being. If he was me do you think he would say these things that willidentify himas me? he is smarter than that.

On a Sunday!

My question is then, if you are not Jose, why did you post so many clues that you are him and now you are denying so vehemently the very claims those "hints" provoked?

On an unrelated point, tell me again your position on the Jose vs WICC case. Was Jose using a computer to assist his online play, or was he snigled out and persecuted by the Bekker, Khalifman and others because he did not fit in to their world view?

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 11:02 AM
Do people know karthich is now Tian? :eek: why dont you talk about that?
So what.
It was clearly obvious that Jeo changed his BB id to Tian.
After all if it wasnt obvious a goose like you would not have worked it out.
BTW to save you wearing out anymore more brain cells you might like to know that Tian is now 1337.
I'll leave it to you to work out the significance of the number 1337.

skip to my lou
27-03-2004, 12:15 PM
http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=109

arosar
27-03-2004, 12:54 PM
For the last time, I can tell you all, 100%, CL is not Jose.

AR

Paul S
27-03-2004, 01:31 PM
For the last time, I can tell you all, 100%, CL is not Jose.

AR

After readng all the posts of the last 2 days or so, I'd say its more like about 40% that Chesslover is not Jose. ;) :lol: :hmm:

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 01:57 PM
After readng all the posts of the last 2 days or so, I'd say its more like about 40% that Chesslover is not Jose. ;) :lol: :hmm:
i want to see how much cl posts tomorrow while jose is playing :lol: :clap: :whistle:

Ian Rout
27-03-2004, 02:09 PM
After readng all the posts of the last 2 days or so, I'd say its more like about 40% that Chesslover is not Jose. ;) :lol: :hmm:
Clearly CL (the character not the person (if it is a person)) is a joke. Either it is Jose but is denying it in spite of giving biographical details which belong to no one else, or is not Jose but is giving Jose's biography in a ham-fisted way that nobody can miss and then getting angry at people drawing precisely the conclusions that he/she was trying to lead them to. But that doesn't tell us who plays the character.

It's an enormous amount of effort to put into a joke. This supports the theory that more than one person is involved; maybe one actor is assigned to each personality or subject or maybe just whoever is available, or perhaps key storylines (e.g CL complains about BB prizes, CL tries to annoy major sponsor, CL praises Dubya) are planned in committee.

Most likely it is a group of Jose's Sydney mates (explaining why AR can be so positive CL is not Jose, and why AR voted for CL in the Best Post prize). Whether Jose is in on the joke or whether he is the subject of the joke is still open to conjecture.

Probably the intended next move is that a CL post will appear at a time when Jose is in front of numerous witnesses without a computer.

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 02:21 PM
Probably the intended next move is that a CL post will appear at a time when Jose is in front of numerous witnesses without a computer.
like the city of sydney tomorrow ;)

shaun
27-03-2004, 02:34 PM
When I was talking to Brett Tindall about whether he was ChessLover, there were other people taking part in the conversation. They scoffed at the suggestion that Brett was CL, as did Brett himself, but they did mention who it was most likely to be. So rather than repeat the mistake of accusing an individual of being CL, I will merely frame the market on CL's identity.
David Castor 75% (A lot of the evidence points to God boy)
Tama Coutts 20% (Not much evidence to support this claim)
Someone else %5 (Just in case I'm still wrong)

I for one do not believe CL is Escribano, but if it is, my estimation of him would go up substantially for pulling it off. And anyway, CL claimed that Escribano would have won an appeal over is disqualification for the WC qualifiers. A little hard when Escribano subsequently admitted his guilt to one of the panel members.

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 02:44 PM
I'm virtually certain that CL is not Jose.

However there is only one person to blame for all this conjecture and that is CL himself.

As Barry notes above:

My question is then, if you are not Jose, why did you post so many clues that you are him and now you are denying so vehemently the very claims those "hints" provoked?

First CL makes a supposed typing error saying "I" instead of "he".
This could have been accidental or deliberate to fuel speculation on his part.

CL himself said in this thread:

I do not want to say who I am for people then judge me without any reason. I have been victimised a lot by people in the chess scene but yet I play on. In tournaments i know that DOPs watch me and have disrespected all the complaints that I have raised which are legitimate. Sometimes when I have complained about the noise level the DOP has kicked me out. Is that fair or just. Being kicked out for complaining about noise in the NSW champs and Charles had no right to do that. The DOP should not abuse his power by kicking oput people for making legitimate complaints. In other tournaments I have been watched and made victimised and they are trying to hound me out of chess. A couple of times they will not even allow me to switch off the noise by having earphones. It is okay for people to make noise but not for me to drown out the noise by having earphones.

Of course after it was pointed out that the reference to Charles would make it significantly easier to determine who CL was, CL edited the above on the 26-03-2004 at 07:18 PM and changed it to the following:

I do not want to say who I am for people then judge me without any reason. I have been victimised a lot by people in the chess scene but yet I play on. In tournaments i know that DOPs watch me and have disrespected all the complaints that I have raised which are legitimate. Sometimes when I have complained about the noise level the DOP has kicked me out. Is that fair or just. The DOP should not abuse his power by kicking oput people for making legitimate complaints. In other tournaments I have been watched and made victimised and they are trying to hound me out of chess.

Clearly the question must be asked.
If his original post was the truth then it would appear CL is Jose in which case my belief that CL is not Jose means I am W-R-O-N-G. :doh: :owned: :hand:
If however the first post was just a red herring, then clearly CL is playing games, in which case his bleatings and related carry ons about other posters speculation makes him not only look like a goose but the BB supreme goose.

Therefore this leads to two possibilities.
1) I am W-R-O-N-G in my belief that CL is not Jose, or
2) CL is a supreme goose.

I wonder which of those CL will go for. :owned:

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 02:48 PM
Probably the intended next move is that a CL post will appear at a time when Jose is in front of numerous witnesses without a computer.
Be aware there is an internet area within Ryde-Eastwood but I'm not sure of its operating hours. I'll check it out and see if its open during the City of Sydney playing session.

Rincewind
27-03-2004, 02:49 PM
When I was talking to Brett Tindall about whether he was ChessLover, there were other people taking part in the conversation. They scoffed at the suggestion that Brett was CL, as did Brett himself, but they did mention who it was most likely to be. So rather than repeat the mistake of accusing an individual of being CL, I will merely frame the market on CL's identity.
David Castor 75% (A lot of the evidence points to God boy)
Tama Coutts 20% (Not much evidence to support this claim)
Someone else %5 (Just in case I'm still wrong)

I for one do not believe CL is Escribano, but if it is, my estimation of him would go up substantially for pulling it off. And anyway, CL claimed that Escribano would have won an appeal over is disqualification for the WC qualifiers. A little hard when Escribano subsequently admitted his guilt to one of the panel members.

I strongly doubt CL is David, I've noly spoken with David a few times but the personalities, mannerisms and idiom of the two are just too incongueous - unless David is playing some sort of elaborate joke and has a lot of free time. However, David might be able to shed some genuine light on the real identity of CL.

With DC elimintated from your market you have
Tama Coutts 80%
Someone else 20%

:D

Personally, I still think JE is the frontrunner. I suspected this for some time now (>12 months) however a few red herrings over the course of time has caused me to reevaluate this position. Recent events however have increased my confidence in the CL = JE hypothesis.

Of course CL posting while JE is playing in the CoSC proves nothing as he could leave his PC switched on with a posting or two sitting on the desktop. His partner or anyone else would just have to press "Post" at the approriate time and viola, "proof" positive he is not Jose.

Ian Rout
27-03-2004, 03:09 PM
Of course CL posting while JE is playing in the CoSC proves nothing as he could leave his PC switched on with a posting or two sitting on the desktop. His partner or anyone else would just have to press "Post" at the approriate time and viola, "proof" positive he is not Jose.
This is why it requires an active CL-committee member rather than a tame button-pusher, so that they can respond to a recent post.

PHAT
27-03-2004, 03:26 PM
If however the first post was just a red herring, then clearly CL is playing games, in which case his bleatings and related carry ons about other posters speculation makes him not only look like a goose but the BB supreme goose.

No, Bill. CL will have trolled very very well and will deserve a big cheer. Most likely, then, is that the BB inhabitants will be seen as a gaggle.

PHAT
27-03-2004, 03:31 PM
David Castor 75% (A lot of the evidence points to God boy)
Tama Coutts 20% (Not much evidence to support this claim)
Someone else %5 (Just in case I'm still wrong)


Castor?? No way - Machiaveli and Goughfather maybe - but CL :hand:

Tama Coutts? Dunno? What is his job? Does he have a daughter?

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 03:37 PM
No, Bill. CL will have trolled very very well and will deserve a big cheer. Most likely, then, is that the BB inhabitants will be seen as a gaggle.
Sorry Matt, I disagree.
Priro to this week there has been virtually no speculation on this BB or the previous ACF BB over CL's identity. As such he had no reason to lie about some of the information he provided in those posts, because he had no reason to feel threatened.
As such I believe information he provided prior to this week is most likely accurate.

It was only after Paul S referred to CL as Jose that CL vigoursly denied it, whilst at the same time making comments in the posts that seemed to support the view that he was Jose.

Therefore I see no major trolling on his part other than in the past few days regarding his identitiy.

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 04:01 PM
CL, maaate. Help me help Jose. Save me some research time and tell me your leave and return dates for when you went over seas - I think it was last year sometime.
Matt,
The following comes from the old BB or from the Zip file containing all the lost psost when the old ACF BB was hacked.

CL's last post on the old ACF BB was July 26th.
On 21/10/03 at 21:21:58 chesslover wrote "I came back this weekend from an overseas trip to my birthplace".
On the 22/10/03 AR asked CL where is birthplace was.
CL replied on 22/10/03 at 21:33:31 : "I am not falling for your tricks Rosario. If I told you where i was born, given that I have disclosed that I run a small business, have a daughter and my partner is Filipina, you will guess my secret identity."

Now although you speculated that CL's trip was to the USA, this obviously isnt his birthplace since CL has pointed out that English is not his first language.

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 04:33 PM
On the old ACF BB CL used Darkwing Duck as his avatar.

In that vein perhaps we should move all the CL identity speculation to a new thread on this BB entitled Who is That Masked Goose. :owned:

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 04:43 PM
Tommorrow I hope Jose issues legal writs against people who call him me.

That's your second goosemaster norm in the bag, continuing to froth about legal action when I told you repeatedly it was nonsense; just one more to go before you join me as a proud recipient of the title. :clap:


Do people know karthich is now Tian? :eek: why dont you talk about that?

Well actually he's now "1337".

This is all getting to be shades of the "Who Is The Turk?" mysteries associated with early chessplaying "automata". A number of those conspiracy theories, when correct, were debunked by having the player alleged of being "inside" the Turk play against the Turk himself; the Turk would have a strong guest operator for this purpose. So if CL is Jose he could arrange for someone to post as CL while he is playing. However one thing that would be convincing would be a lengthy conversation with CL in character while Jose is playing. CL has a very recognisable posting style.

I believe that all CL posts have been made by a single poster, who sometimes deliberately trolls and at other times actually takes this all a bit too seriously. I am still skeptical about it being Jose.

Rincewind
27-03-2004, 04:49 PM
This is why it requires an active CL-committee member rather than a tame button-pusher, so that they can respond to a recent post.

Perhaps CL could leave a couple of pages of pro-Bush drivel and someone could cut and paste enough paragraphs to make it appear to be an authentic CL post.

In fact, there is a pet theory of mine that this is how CL forms his posts most of the time anyway. ;)

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 05:14 PM
A few that got posted to the old thread while I was splitting it:


This could be a red herring but didn't Jose compete in the Ryde-Eastwood weekender on the Labour Day long weekend in early October last year?

He also competed in the Grade Matches for the Wests u-1800 team. He was absent for rounds 3-6 (around 1 month early-June to early-July from memory) but played in rounds 2 and 7. (Round 2 he lost to talented 13-y-o Adrian Miranda from Canterbury , but I digress).

Jose also competed in the Steiner Memorial from mid-August. Coal City Open the week before that, and the Fairfield winter cup July 12 and 13.

So if Jose was out of the country in that timeframe it was only in the June to early-July window.

Of course other commitments or lack of access to the internet could also explain the lack of posts in that period.


i am not going to dignify the speculation about me and this is the last time I will post on this thread. You can speculate all you want but you are all wrong

I am one person and I am not Jose. People who believe otherwise are being stupid ( as in S-T-U-P-I-D)

I am not going to comment on how there was victimisation in the disqualification of Jose's World Champ KO as it will just serve to give more ammunition to people

I think we should get back to the topics that concern us all about Australian chess. Let us discuss the problems that affect chess and how to solve them. Trying to guess who I am is pointless for I am now on my guard and will no longer be posting any personal information or trying to bluff or double bluff or thriple bluff anyone. And even if I did make a mistake and reveal personal information how do you know it was not a red herring?????

I confess that I am not Jose and tried to make people think that I am Jose. Amiel has confirmed tha I am not chesslover so this line of speculation is pointless

Thus I suggest that we play the game and not the man. Let us talk about Australian chess

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 05:30 PM
Jose played in a number of tournaments over the period that CL was overseas most notably last years NSW State Championship U2000 section.

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 05:33 PM
On the old ACF BB CL posted in a reply to Ian Rout at some stage after the June ratings were published that he was rated in the 1600's.
Following is a list of all 94 NSW players who were rated between 1600 and 1699 on the June 2003 rating list.

This is an unedited list containing even juniors and women.


1648 Adams, Doug G
1610!! Alberici, Ernesto
1607 Arocha, Leandro
1616! Baaner, Paul
1626! Bajrami, Samir
1651!! Barakat, Martin
1619!! Baterowicz, Mark
1639! Bautista, Elpidio
1611!! Beretov, Kosta
1667! Blazeski, Krste
1683!! Bleicher, Horst
1672!! Boardman, Jeffery
1639! Bogdanoski, Petre
1675! Bristina, Husein
1604!! Buza, Mohamed
1602 Bye, Robin
1657!! Carey, Doug D
1628 Chong, Yvonne
1608!! Clark, Dominic
1611! Connolly, David
1602!! Creek, P
1683!! Cronan, James
1655!! Cvetkoski, Tode
1607! Datuin, Marc
1659!! Dickson, Ian C
1673!! Djukovic, Dragan
1607?? Epstein, Stephen D
1696! Feldman, Alex
1643! Gaiter, Warren
1674! Galwey, Richard C
1697 Gilbert, Patrick J
1685! Gray, McClure
1615 Guenette, Pierre C
1654 Gunawan, Hadi
1618! Hale, Dennis
1680 Haramina, Slavko
1643! Hellmann, Oscar
1632 Ho, C C
1655? Holloway, Megan
1608!! Huddleston, Heather
1652! Isaac, Ashur
1691!! Javor, Stephen
1698!! Jovanovic, Stevan
1601!! Kite, Ron W
1634!! Kodzoman, Ivan
1666!! Krajina, Sead
1699! Lawrenz, Jurgen
1666! Lin, Hong
1662 Lin, Robert
1613? Lincoln, Ian P
1640 Low, Frank
1628 Mackie, Morrie C
1638 McGrath, Gordon
1626! Mejias, Frank T
1673! Mejzini, Jack
1634!! Montgomery, Craig P
1656!! Mulato, Jose
1661!! Murrell, Malcolm R
1695! Myers, Stephen P
1695 Narenthran, Tharmaratnam
1600! Nunevski, Bill
1690!! O'Riordan, Bernard
1669? Owies, William
1644!! Press, Brian J
1685! Pritchard, Trevor J
1674! Richards, Allan
1652! Rogers, Cathy L
1692!! Rosario, Amiel
1678!! Sandalciyan, Aram
1608!! Savelieff, Geoffrey
1608!! Schwandl, Hans
1651 Shosho, David
1604! Simmons, Robert W
1650! Sims, A (Tony)T
1635! Sitompul, Sotarduga
1655 Sloper, Christian
1612!! Song, Raymond
1621!! Soto, Leopoldo
1613!! Steer, Ian
1633 Stenner, James P
1601 Storey, Ian
1697!! Tiqui, Norie
1680!! Tomac, Jack
1663!! Varela, Peter
1603! Vowles, Justin
1663! Watharow, Sean P
1694! Webb, Selwyn
1607 Williams, Jason M
1689!! Wright, Cameron
1674!! Ymalay, Joe M
1631! Yu, Colman
1612! Yu, Michael
1639! Yum, Brenton
1641 Zielinski, Konrad

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 05:44 PM
I'm suprised that CL did not jump on the fact that I stated I did not believe he was Jose.

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 05:51 PM
Trying to guess who I am is pointless for I am now on my guard and will no longer be posting any personal information or trying to bluff or double bluff or thriple bluff anyone.
I suspect there is enough valid information to draw a conclusion from based on your posts prior to this Jose speculation.


And even if I did make a mistake and reveal personal information how do you know it was not a red herring?????
Because your not that clever to have been playing that game from the start.


I confess that I am not Jose and tried to make people think that I am Jose.
Guess that means of the two possibilities I proposed before it os the Supreme Goose one that was correct. :owned:


Amiel has confirmed tha I am not chesslover so this line of speculation is pointless
You really do need to watch your typing mistakes.
Obviously CL you meant you are not Jose rather than not chesslover.
Either that or you are terribly confused. :whistle:

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 06:12 PM
yes lets talk about what is important in australian chess, but how do you propose that some of your ideas get put into action, when you would have to make a submission to the acf council using your real name :lol:

Rincewind
27-03-2004, 06:23 PM
On the old ACF BB CL posted in a reply to Ian Rout at some stage after the June ratings were published that he was rated in the 1600's.
Following is a list of all 94 NSW players who were rated between 1600 and 1699 on the June 2003 rating list.

This is an unedited list containing even juniors and women.

It does, although there is not conclusive evidence that CL is neither. Apart from the obvious I can almost definitely eliminate Paul Baaner as a CL suspect.

Edit: And Martin Barakat!

They're both locals.

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 06:36 PM
Also transferring:


well if you are not chesslover, chesslover, then WHO are you ? :owned:

:whistle:
:hand:

eclectic

eclectic
27-03-2004, 06:37 PM
Obviously CL you meant you are not Jose rather than not chesslover.
Either that or you are terribly confused. :whistle:
Bill,

I also noted the gaffe but unfortunately posted to the old thread just as Kevin was doing the split and so it was left stranded there

eclectic

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 06:43 PM
Chesslover says that he is not chesslover. Classic! (I edited a post I'd made which mistakenly said the same thing - maybe I should have left it. :p )

chesslover
27-03-2004, 06:55 PM
you all like a packk of hunting dog smelling blood

I find all of this ditressing and causing me a lot of emotional pain and appeal to your good nature to stop trying to find out who I am

I told you that I want to be an IM and even take up chess full time as a professional once I have saved enough money and my daughter grows up. By trying to umask me you will cause me a lot of problems as already the chess higher ups do not like me and view everything that I do with suspicion

So I am appealing to people's good nature. STOP hounding me and looking for clues.

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 07:04 PM
I told you that I want to be an IM and even take up chess full time as a professional once I have saved enough money and my daughter grows up.

If you're a 1600s player at around age 40 you have no chance at all of ever becoming an IM. I'm around 2000 in my early 30s and I'd be very surprised if I ever reached FM strength. Be realistic.

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 07:09 PM
you all like a packk of hunting dog smelling blood
thanks for the compliment :lol:


I find all of this ditressing and causing me a lot of emotional pain and appeal to your good nature to stop trying to find out who I amyou could just tell us and end the suspense ;)


So I am appealing to people's good nature. STOP hounding me and looking for clues. not going to happen.

you posted this earlier chesslover:


From now on I will not post without thinking and saying teh first thing I will think of. I will post less and also think and reread what I type before posting. There will be no more clues in my posts that will indicate who I am. I hope people are happy about ruining me and Joseand for causing him a lot of stress and agitation.

and now:


I told you that I want to be an IM and even take up chess full time as a professional once I have saved enough money and my daughter grows up. By trying to umask me you will cause me a lot of problems as already the chess higher ups do not like me and view everything that I do with suspicion

you couldnt even last one day with your quote about not giving anything away. :whistle:

Does this qualify Kevin for the third norm for goosemaster? ;)

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 07:27 PM
Does this qualify Kevin for the third norm for goosemaster? ;)

I don't think so. You're not normally allowed to score two norms in the same event. :eek:

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 07:39 PM
I don't think so. You're not normally allowed to score two norms in the same event. :eek:
:lol: :lol: :owned: :owned: :whistle: :whistle: but also normally a person cannot claim a title as their own, like the first goosemaster title to be awarded ;)

ursogr8
27-03-2004, 10:23 PM
However, David might be able to shed some genuine light on the real identity of CL.

With DC elimintated from your market you have
Tama Coutts 80%
Someone else 20%




Baz
How about rolling out some of that mathematical ability of yours and framing a market on the supposed CL committe. That would interest me as a by-stander.
starter

Rhubarb
27-03-2004, 10:34 PM
Having been away from the discussion for 24 hours, I am surprised by the number of people who are actually not sure that Escribano is chesslover (at least most of the time - the gimp in the basement provides the red herrings). Perhaps it's because they are not from NSW?

If the gimp is any one of Rosario, Castor or Coutts, my opinion of them is irrevocably lowered.

An idiot is an idiot, and a troll is a troll. It's unforgivable to be both.

Rhubarb
27-03-2004, 10:41 PM
brett tindall has been proven to not be cl

ok, i'll edit the previous post (for what it's worth).

chesslover
27-03-2004, 10:47 PM
If you're a 1600s player at around age 40 you have no chance at all of ever becoming an IM. I'm around 2000 in my early 30s and I'd be very surprised if I ever reached FM strength. Be realistic.


I am being relistic. I know I cannot be a GM but I have set my sight on being an IM. Otherwise all I can aim for is to get 1800 rating or 2000 or the FM title. Aiming to be an IM inspires me when I play chess and I try to play like an IM would.

Without dreams and hopes we lead a barren exsitence

Rincewind
27-03-2004, 10:48 PM
How about rolling out some of that mathematical ability of yours and framing a market on the supposed CL committe. That would interest me as a by-stander.

Sounds too much like statistics to me. :) Haven't you got a meaty d.e. I can sink my teeth into?

How about the Goose diffusion formula?

dG/dt = -k(d^2G/dx^2)

:lol:

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 10:50 PM
I am being relistic. I know I cannot be a GM but I have set my sight on being an IM. Otherwise all I can aim for is to get 1800 rating or 2000 or the FM title. Aiming to be an IM inspires me when I play chess and I try to play like an IM would.

Without dreams and hopes we lead a barren exsitence
that would mean you are playing in the city of sydney tomorrow, is that right?

Trent Parker
27-03-2004, 10:56 PM
and even if you have a really high iq, you can still be an idiot and a goose :doh: sometimes even at the same time ;)

Didn't Paul "fatty" Vautin get above 120 in that national iq test they had on TV a while back? lol

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 10:57 PM
Didn't Paul "fatty" Vautin get above 120 in that national iq test they had on TV a while back? lol
unbelievable as it is, paul vautin is actually a high intelligent man, i dont agree with those tv iq tests though

Trent Parker
27-03-2004, 11:01 PM
nor do i really. Bu p vautin is still a goose.

Trent Parker
27-03-2004, 11:02 PM
BTW escribano doesn't sound like an eastern european name to me. maybe i'm wrong

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 11:02 PM
nor do i really. Bu p vautin is still a goose.
if you want to start a new topic on whether paul vautin is intelligent, go ahead, but plz dont distract us from working on who is cl ;)

chesslover
27-03-2004, 11:02 PM
unbelievable as it is, paul vautin is actually a high intelligent man, i dont agree with those tv iq tests though

I told you League is a great game. Vautin captained manly and lead them to a premiership. I hated manly but now they have gone from one of the richest teams to one of the poorest. If Gould and a couple of the NSWRL people have their way Manly will be kicked out to make way for a Central Coast expansion in 2006

The Footy show is also very good and the league version is so much better than the AFL version. VAutin is now very rich as well and is friends with the packers. Good luck to fatty

Rhubarb
27-03-2004, 11:04 PM
I am being relistic. I know I cannot be a GM but I have set my sight on being an IM. Otherwise all I can aim for is to get 1800 rating or 2000 or the FM title. Aiming to be an IM inspires me when I play chess and I try to play like an IM would.

Without dreams and hopes we lead a barren exsitence
It doesn't matter what level you get to. You will always be held in utter contempt by your peers.

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 11:06 PM
It doesn't matter what level you get to. You will always be held in utter contempt by your peers.
does that mean you know who cl is :lol: :hmm:

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 11:07 PM
It doesn't matter what level you get to. You will always be held in utter contempt by your peers.

Ouch. I have to say that if he is Escribano this statement is almost certainly true.

chesslover
27-03-2004, 11:08 PM
It doesn't matter what level you get to. You will always be held in utter contempt by your peers.

just because your chess career has stalled does not mean that everyone else is in the same boat. maybe if you study chess a little bit more and [deleted] you too could aim to be an IM ...lets make that a FM (no need to hope for a miracle hey mate) one day :mad:

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 11:10 PM
me thinks that bill will post greg canfells rating period results to confirm if cl's conclusion is true :eek:

chesslover
27-03-2004, 11:11 PM
Ouch. I have to say that if he is Escribano this statement is almost certainly true.

You have no right to make that statement. I am not and never have been Jose but I feel bad for him

What would you know stuck in the little pathetic inbred island of yours and cutoff from the mainstream of chess in the mainland :mad: :mad:

Firegoat was right when he said that the MCC club event was stronger than your state championship :clap:

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 11:12 PM
BTW escribano doesn't sound like an eastern european name to me. maybe i'm wrong

Me neither. Assuming all the info supplied by CL about himself is accurate he is definitely not Escribano.

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 11:16 PM
You have no right to make that statement. I am not and never have been Jose but I feel bad for him

I have every right to make that statement and there is no need to get personal with me for making it. Whether or not I sympathise with Escribano is irrelevant, it is a fact that his reputation among many in the chess community over all sorts of incidents is irrecoverably bad. I am not taking sides against him, I am simply stating a reality.


What would you know stuck in the little pathetic inbred island of yours and cutoff from the mainstream of chess in the mainland :mad: :mad:

Before you get too huffy about this and say anything else you will later regret let me remind you that I was not even born here.


Firegoat was right when he said that the MCC club event was stronger than your state championship

Of course he was, if by that you mean the top division of the MCC championships. Gargantuan obese hirsute transaction. :hmm:

Rhubarb
27-03-2004, 11:19 PM
Just a thought: chesslover is either escribano, or escribano plus some sad, sad cretins who troll. So, can anyone do the IP address thing? I don't know much about the technology.

P.S. For all of you who don't think that escribano is part of the chesslover bullshit stream, imagine for a moment that he wasn't. Would such a player, with all his history, remain silent in this forum after his 'friends' had let him know about this controversy?

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 11:20 PM
...lets make that a FM (no need to hope for a miracle hey mate) one day :mad:

No need to hope for a miracle indeed. Greg already is an FM.

Garvinator
27-03-2004, 11:21 PM
lets for a moment think that cl is not jose :hmm: imagine what would happen if the real jose came on here saying he isnt cl :eek:

Kevin Bonham
27-03-2004, 11:24 PM
So, can anyone do the IP address thing? I don't know much about the technology.

I can, but I believe this information should be confidential and only used when someone is abusing their responsibilities as a poster, so I haven't checked.

At some stage in the past when CL was falsely accused of being someone (Bill Gletsos I think) I looked up CL's post times. His post times were generally very consistent with someone who works on weekdays.


P.S. For all of you who don't think that escribano is part of the chesslover bullshit stream, imagine for a moment that he wasn't. Would such a player, with all his history, remain silent in this forum after his 'friends' had let him know about this controversy?

Wait and see, I guess. Jose did show up on the forums once before during the whole World Championship qualification debacle, I think, but other mentions of his name have not smoked him out of the woodwork.

Bill Gletsos
27-03-2004, 11:40 PM
um, i'll have to take your word for that, Bill
Actually I looked at that earlier today when I was researching when CL had started to repost after his O/S trip.

Oh and just for the record I'm neither CL or Jose for which I am truly thankful. :owned:

Rhubarb
28-03-2004, 12:26 AM
Oh and just for the record I'm neither CL or Jose for which I am truly thankful. :owned:

:lol:

Just got that one, Bill. You wouldn't want the phrase: "when CL was falsely accused of being someone (Bill Gletsos I think)" to be misinterpreted.

Bill Gletsos
28-03-2004, 12:42 AM
As I said above, I dont think CL is Jose.
I think CL is someone else.
At this stage however I havent worked out who.

Rhubarb
28-03-2004, 01:39 AM
As I said above, I dont think CL is Jose.
I think CL is someone else.
At this stage however I havent worked out who.

With all due respect, Bill, I cannot believe that someone near the top percentile like yourself has blundered into all the red-herring traps of the dunderheaded hydra that is chesslover.

Perhaps escribano emails his posts to someone like rosario, or some other right-wing troll, to post under the name of chesslover, and rosario adds all the other crap. I don't know the specifics of it. I do know that escribano is involved and I'm astounded that you cannot see that.

ursogr8
28-03-2004, 09:00 AM
Sounds too much like statistics to me. :) Haven't you got a meaty d.e. I can sink my teeth into?

How about the Goose diffusion formula?

dG/dt = -k(d^2G/dx^2)

:lol:

hi Barry

Your response is humourous, clever, and clear.
But Baz, it is also diverting.
If you can't put numbers against the likelihoods of individuals being on the CL Committee, then at the least you could help the out-of-Staters by listing the names. Could you do that for us?
Or are you one of the names? :eek: :eek:

starter

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 10:03 AM
every one of us is in on it starter ;)

Thunk
28-03-2004, 10:11 AM
As I said above, I dont think CL is Jose.
I think CL is someone else.
At this stage however I havent worked out who.

mr glEtsos

down at thE club wE arE long-timE admirErs of your obsErvations for all important aspEcts of thE bullEtin board.
can you rEcall if mr chEslovEr has postEd on thE topic of farnarkElling?
if thE answEr is yEs thEn that would narrow down thE suspEcts is a vEry significant way.

:hmm: ;) thE HUNK ;) :hmm:

Rincewind
28-03-2004, 10:41 AM
If you can't put numbers against the likelihoods of individuals being on the CL Committee, then at the least you could help the out-of-Staters by listing the names. Could you do that for us?
Or are you one of the names? :eek: :eek:

Sorry starter but I think I'm too far out of the loop to add any value in this area. I come from the small but picturesque fishing village of Wollongong and the wheeling and dealing of these blokes from the big-smoke are beyond my ken.

BTW I did think of someting which may be relevent (for a change). Analyse the name Jose Escribano.

Jose the spanish version of Joseph. As in Joe, as in Joe average.

Escribano from the Latin scribere = to write.

So it's Joe Writer. Perhaps we have been looking under the wrong bushel! Chesslover isn't the nom de plume - Jose Escribano is!

It is incorrect to save Jose is Chesslover, rather Chesslover is Jose. :D

Does this help you guys south of the Rio Grande?

ursogr8
28-03-2004, 10:48 AM
Sorry starter but I think I'm too far out of the loop to add any value in this area. I come from the small but picturesque fishing village of Wollongong and the wheeling and dealing of these blokes from the big-smoke are beyond my ken.

BTW I did think of someting which may be relevent (for a change). Analyse the name Jose Escribano.

Jose the spanish version of Joseph. As in Joe, as in Joe average.

Escribano from the Latin scribere = to write.

So it's Joe Writer. Perhaps we have been looking under the wrong bushel! Chesslover isn't the nom de plume - Jose Escribano is!

It is incorrect to save Jose is Chesslover, rather Chesslover is Jose. :D

Does this help you guys south of the Rio Grande?

Baz
So many clues (on who is CL), so little time to store them in the one place.
I think I will just wait for the CD to come out with a compilation set of clues.


And maybe you had better watch out just in case JE is real; he may resent your inference that he is virtual. :eek:
starter

PHAT
28-03-2004, 10:51 AM
It doesn't matter what level you [CL] get to. You will always be held in utter contempt by your peers.

I am not sure that that is true. CL is just some bloke with some silly ideas re Bush, Israel, and accountability regardless of impracticalities. Antway, I reckon CL is probably OK enough to have a beer with.

Rincewind
28-03-2004, 10:56 AM
And maybe you had better watch out just in case JE is real; he may resent your inference that he is virtual. :eek:

I included a perfunctory smilie. :angel:

PHAT
28-03-2004, 10:59 AM
Ouch. I have to say that if he is Escribano this statement is almost certainly true.

On this, I am not too sure. "Contempt" is a big word - like "hate". Jose has done some extraordinarily annoying things, but nonthing that should earn "contempt". I would say that any sport looses when "characters" are ostrisised.

PHAT
28-03-2004, 11:01 AM
just because your chess career has stalled does not mean that everyone else is in the same boat. maybe if you study chess a little bit more and [deleted] you too could aim to be an IM ...lets make that a FM (no need to hope for a miracle hey mate) one day :mad:

I demand to know what was deleted! Surely it should have been left in for humour.

Kevin Bonham
28-03-2004, 12:22 PM
I demand to know what was deleted! Surely it should have been left in for humour.

It was something along the lines of "drink a lot less", I zapped it in case it was defamatory but Greg's since told me he has no problem with it being said.

peanbrain
28-03-2004, 01:13 PM
I am not sure that that is true. CL is just some bloke with some silly ideas re Bush, Israel, and accountability regardless of impracticalities. Antway, I reckon CL is probably OK enough to have a beer with.

CL is so pro bush that I think he's got to be an American or lived in the US for a few years - maybe even worked for some crapy hyprocrat organization like the world bank or something. :eek:

As for a beer with Matt - I wouldn't count on it .... the moment matt comes back from the toilet with his unwashed urine stained hands will be the end of that friendship between CL and matt!! :whistle:

Bill Gletsos
28-03-2004, 01:19 PM
With all due respect, Bill, I cannot believe that someone near the top percentile like yourself has blundered into all the red-herring traps of the dunderheaded hydra that is chesslover.
Maybe my error if I actually am in error is that I dont believe CL is clever enough to have been pulling this scam from the very start.
As I said up until this week there has been no speculation on the BB over the past 12 mths about CL's identity. Therefore he had no real concerns about possible discovery of his identity.
Therefore I dont believe any clues that he dropped prior to this week were part of some grand scheme of his to cloud his identity but were rather just statements that he made the consequencs of which he failed to consoder.
After all someone rated in the 1600's isnt likely to be big on long range/long term strategical plans and even if by some means they are its then unlikely they can carry them out successfully to fruition. :whistle:


Perhaps escribano emails his posts to someone like rosario, or some other right-wing troll, to post under the name of chesslover, and rosario adds all the other crap. I don't know the specifics of it. I do know that escribano is involved and I'm astounded that you cannot see that.
On this we will have to agree to disagree. ;)

shaun
28-03-2004, 02:49 PM
CL was a troll from the start, so nothing can be taken at face value. But the guys who dropped a dime on David Castor didn't say "I know who it is", it was more along the lines of "I know this guy". And this was before I was aware of the make up of one of the Western Suburbs grade teams (Tindall, Castor, Bird, Moylan).
Note to CL watchers. When an incorrect name is proposed, CL will begin to throw clues in that direction, hence the not so subtle "I might be Escribano" clues he is leaving, while at the same time denying it. Merely a smokescreen.

ursogr8
28-03-2004, 03:12 PM
troll v.,n.
as in

http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/t/troll.html


?

Alan Shore
28-03-2004, 03:28 PM
After all someone rated in the 1600's isnt likely to be big on long range/long term strategical plans and even if by some means they are its then unlikely they can carry them out successfully to fruition. :whistle:



Bill that's soooooo cruel! But I doubt there's any correlation there whatsoever - I know some very intelligent people rated <1400 and some real dimwits rated >1800.

tabiya
28-03-2004, 03:42 PM
Hi to all readers. I find it hard to believe that the postings which appear in this forum under the name "Chesslover" could be attributed to me, a trained philosopher. Clarity of expression is one of the many requirements of good philosophical writing. The posts that appear under the name "Chesslover" are remarkable for their bad grammar, poor punctuation and sloppy argumentation. Unless you believe I have the time and inclination to produce a huge number of semiliterate posts you will conclude that I am not the writer of the posts that appear under the name "Chesslover".
Thanks,
Tama

P.S. Here is a useful distinction regarding Chesslover's claim that Canfell's career has stalled. Roughly speaking one might say either of the following things:

1) "My career isn't progressing because I lack the ability to move it forward"
2) "My career isn't progressing because I am doing other things"

I would suggest that Canfell could correctly assert (2).

frogmogdog
28-03-2004, 03:47 PM
hey, that was an entertaining 12 pages. the first time i've read all a long thread.

some stuff going on needs to be reconciled -

1. CL does not want their identity known.
2. CL says they greatly admire jose (indeed, s/he almost sounds like s/he wished they were him)
3. CL says they're not jose

i can't see a committee bothering to do this. i think it's one person. and if it's all trolling and multiple bluffs, then i simply can't see that anyone with the intelligence and sense of humour to pull it off could be bothered putting in the effort.

anyway, chesslover - why are you so upset that people incorrectly believe you to be jose? shouldn't you be flattered? do you feel inferior to jose and hold concerns that your activities besmirch his reputation?

also chesslover, you said jose's IQ was in the top quartile. i'm just curious, any word on the quartile of his EQ?

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 04:10 PM
some stuff going on needs to be reconciled -

1. CL does not want their identity known.
2. CL says they greatly admire jose (indeed, s/he almost sounds like s/he wished they were him)
3. CL says they're not jose

interesting that you say cl doesnt want THEIR identity known. This implies more than one more person. do you know something that we dont :hmm: maybe you are in on this, maybe frogmogdog and cl are the same person :whistle:

Alan Shore
28-03-2004, 04:16 PM
interesting that you say cl doesnt want THEIR identity known. This implies more than one more person. do you know something that we dont :hmm: maybe you are in on this, maybe frogmogdog and cl are the same person :whistle:

I'm sure he used 'their' in the sense of being PC, rather than limiting the possibility to 'his' identity. Your theory is possible though ;)

frogmogdog
28-03-2004, 04:55 PM
i'm not commenting until i've seen my lawyer.

here's another thought too - many millions of people born in the USA have spanish not english as their first language.

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 04:59 PM
i'm not commenting until i've seen my lawyer.

make sure you tell us exactly what the lawyer said when the lawyer tells you that you have no case. On what grounds are you seeing a lawyer. Plz let it not be defamation, Kevin has already smashed you on that before, you cant claim defamation. :doh:

Bill Gletsos
28-03-2004, 05:27 PM
Bill that's soooooo cruel! But I doubt there's any correlation there whatsoever - I know some very intelligent people rated <1400 and some real dimwits rated >1800.
I wan't linking it to IQ or being smart or a dimwit, but the ability to think strategically.

Kevin Bonham
28-03-2004, 06:47 PM
On what grounds are you seeing a lawyer. Plz let it not be defamation, Kevin has already smashed you on that before, you cant claim defamation. :doh:

We can't defame chesslover by saying he is <insert name here> but you just might defame various <insert name heres>, JE not being one of them, by saying that they are chesslover. For instance if Tama Coutts had asked me to delete all claims that he is chesslover (or 20% of chesslover) I would have done so.


Note to CL watchers. When an incorrect name is proposed, CL will begin to throw clues in that direction, hence the not so subtle "I might be Escribano" clues he is leaving, while at the same time denying it. Merely a smokescreen.

I agree with this. None of the evidence pointed to Escribano until CL was accused of being Escribano. I'm still not convinced that CL is a pure troll though, I think he only trolls sometimes.

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 06:54 PM
make sure you tell us exactly what the lawyer said when the lawyer tells you that you have no case. On what grounds are you seeing a lawyer. Plz let it not be defamation, Kevin has already smashed you on that before, you cant claim defamation. :doh:
i was trying to catch cl out :(

eclectic
28-03-2004, 07:13 PM
i was trying to catch cl out :(
if chesslover took out a court order demanding that each of us reveal our identity plus provide an updated photograph of ourselves as our avatar may i ask who here would still be keen on throwing sh*t at him or wanting his identity revealed

just a thought

:hmm:

eclectic

Bill Gletsos
28-03-2004, 07:38 PM
if chesslover took out a court order demanding that each of us reveal our identity plus provide an updated photograph of ourselves as our avatar may i ask who here would still be keen on throwing sh*t at him or wanting his identity revealed

just a thought

:hmm:

eclectic
It clearly wouldnt worry those of us using our real names, now would it. :whistle:

Bill Gletsos
28-03-2004, 07:40 PM
i was trying to catch cl out :(
I've actually spoken to frog on the phone and frog is not even in NSW.
I can assure you he isnt CL.

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 07:44 PM
I've actually spoken to frog on the phone and frog is not even in NSW.
I can assure you he isnt CL.
ok that is another one down :doh: can i ask which state frog is from?

frogmogdog
28-03-2004, 07:54 PM
this little froggie's from qld.
(although it's possible some of the frog committee are in sydney.)

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 08:04 PM
this little froggie's from qld.
(although it's possible some of the frog committee are in sydney.)
another qlder hey, do i know who you are in person?

frogmogdog
28-03-2004, 08:12 PM
hi ggray
it's unlikely you know me. i'm a halo-wearing junior-chess-organising volunteer. bill is the keeper of knowledge and trusted custodian of my secret identity.

Ian Rout
28-03-2004, 08:19 PM
if chesslover took out a court order demanding that each of us reveal our identity plus provide an updated photograph of ourselves as our avatar may i ask who here would still be keen on throwing sh*t at him or wanting his identity revealed

just a thought

:hmm:

eclectic
Am I missing something or don't you have to actually get a court to agree rather than just "take out a court order"? Are you telling us that CL is a judge?

shaun
28-03-2004, 08:47 PM
Hi to all readers. I find it hard to believe that the postings which appear in this forum under the name "Chesslover" could be attributed to me, a trained philosopher.

If it is any consolation Tama, I didn't think it was likely to be you, but it was one of the names mentioned in conversation. Anyway, it is pretty clear who I think it is.

PHAT
28-03-2004, 08:52 PM
... demanding that each of us reveal our identity plus provide an updated photograph of ourselves as our avatar


I have complied with both.

Alan Shore
28-03-2004, 09:24 PM
hi ggray
it's unlikely you know me. i'm a halo-wearing junior-chess-organising volunteer. bill is the keeper of knowledge and trusted custodian of my secret identity.

If that's the case, it's very probable I know you :)

eclectic
28-03-2004, 09:24 PM
Am I missing something or don't you have to actually get a court to agree rather than just "take out a court order"? Are you telling us that CL is a judge?
by using the phrase "take out a court order" i am assuming for the sake of argument that a court has agreed to such a request

eclectic

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 09:25 PM
hi ggray
it's unlikely you know me. i'm a halo-wearing junior-chess-organising volunteer. bill is the keeper of knowledge and trusted custodian of my secret identity.
are you involved with junior organisation and coaching at the gardiner chess centre?

eclectic
28-03-2004, 09:29 PM
It clearly wouldnt worry those of us using our real names, now would it. :whistle:
i quite like using this nom de plume

and besides

i have a feeling my identity is known to some

however

i'm not as big a fish to fry as chesslover is

am i now ?

:whistle:

eclectic

Garvinator
28-03-2004, 09:31 PM
i quite like using this nom de plume

and besides

i have a feeling my identity is known to some

however

i'm not as big a fish to fry as chesslover is

am i now ?

:whistle:

eclectic

keep this up and ill create a thread called who is eclectic ;) :owned: :hand:

Lucena
28-03-2004, 11:50 PM
What we have to do is give chesslover best post of 2004 so he has to identify himself to get his prize :D

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 10:26 AM
What we have to do is give chesslover best post of 2004 so he has to identify himself to get his prize :D
we could always have a best post of march 2004 prize ;)

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 01:26 PM
What we have to do is give chesslover best post of 2004 so he has to identify himself to get his prize :D
It didn't take you long to get into the swing of things on here now, did it. :lol:

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 01:29 PM
we could always have a best post of march 2004 prize ;)
Of course there is no guarantee he would win it.
Therefore a better contest with a prize would be "The biggest goose of 2004" or possibly a belated biggest goose of 2003 prize. :owned:

Lucena
29-03-2004, 01:57 PM
:lol: :lol: i was actually asking an innocent question on that one, but i did think about asking, are you chesslover :eek: :hand:

yes well it's good you didn't. I'm strongly against the Shaun Press "I know you're from NSW so therefore I reckon you're chesslover" approach. I think the ones with the best chance by far of cracking this enigma are the NSW players. It's just going to be really hard for people from other states to guess, unless they have substantial knowledge about the NSW chess scene. I know I for one wouldn't try and guess the identity of some anonymous in Victoria. The scenario I suspect is that what we have here is some relative chess unknown with a lot of time on his hands who doesn't know how to get his kicks except by being a nong on the bulletin board.

arosar
29-03-2004, 02:21 PM
The scenario I suspect is that what we have here is some relative chess unknown with a lot of time on his hands who doesn't know how to get his kicks except by being a nong on the bulletin board.

I reckon what we have here is, in fact, a very very well-known chess identity.

And what the hec is a nong?

AR

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 02:40 PM
I reckon what we have here is, in fact, a very very well-known chess identity.

And what the hec is a nong?

AR
Nong, short for ning-nong, as in idiot or moron. :whistle:

arosar
29-03-2004, 04:11 PM
Yesterday, CL was the talk of the tournament. And it appears that we have another candidate as to who he might be. I can announce to all that this new candidate is definitely not chesslover.

AR

Alan Shore
29-03-2004, 04:41 PM
yes well it's good you didn't. I'm strongly against the Shaun Press "I know you're from NSW so therefore I reckon you're chesslover" approach.

Me too, but then I'm against a fair few of Mr Press's approaches... :eek:

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 07:52 PM
On this, I am not too sure. "Contempt" is a big word - like "hate". Jose has done some extraordinarily annoying things, but nonthing that should earn "contempt". I would say that any sport looses when "characters" are ostrisised.

Do you really think so, Matt? Personally, I think the chess community has been extraordinarily tolerant of Escribano. It is hard to imagine any other sport or endeavour that would not have banned him for life for half of what he has done.

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 08:03 PM
Maybe my error if I actually am in error is that I dont believe CL is clever enough to have been pulling this scam from the very start.


It doesn't require anyone who is clever. It just takes more than one person. As far as I know, Ian Rout was the first to suggest this, but apart from me no-one seems to be giving this much credence? It could be that one or more of the people involved don't even post to the forum themselves, but email their posts to someone else who posts them under chesslover's handle.

This way all the apparent inconsistencies in biographical information are explained (of course, they could just be lies anyway).

Anyway, I now know two of the people involved in the chesslover scam, and am fairly sure of a third.

PHAT
29-03-2004, 08:04 PM
A life ban. THAT is tough. I think just keep upping the punitive penalties until he "behaves". I mean, it is not as if he is a NRL player.

chesslover
29-03-2004, 08:09 PM
Do you really think so, Matt? Personally, I think the chess community has been extraordinarily tolerant of Escribano. It is hard to imagine any other sport or endeavour that would not have banned him for life for half of what he has done.

Yes that is your personal opinion. Why don't you concentrate on your chess instead of being too harsh on poor Jose

I think the opposite of you. I think that poor Jose has been victimised and been the subject of a lot of harrassment by organsiers and DOPs. I know for a fact that whenever he plays the opponents and the organisers are itching to kick him out. It seems that that is how they measure their toughness

And the fuss and warning letter for me wearing the earphones and listening to music was just stupid. Anyone is entitled to wear earphones and listen to music to shut out the noise yet until Jose did so no one cared so much about it.

And do you think that if it was YOU that went so close to qualifying for the World Champs KO that you would have had so much scrutiny. The fuss that was made and allegations that he was cheating was made well before he was even forced to confess it. He shoudl have deny deny deny and threaten legal action like a couple of others did in the Zonal.

Even parr said that the game was rigged and he quoted the moves of teh game and showed how that had been played a long time before and yet nothing happened. One of these people like poor honest Jose confessed yet it was only me that was branded a cheat. WHY?

People shpould not ne so nasty to Jose. he is a wonderful and kind human being and unless a person walks in anothers shoe they do not know about that person

None of this should be interpreted as meaning that I am Jose or Jose is me. I am just a close friend of his that feels very upset when he is attacked unfairly.This is not a red herring a confession.

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 08:11 PM
1. CL does not want their identity known.
2. CL says they greatly admire jose (indeed, s/he almost sounds like s/he wished they were him)
3. CL says they're not jose

i can't see a committee bothering to do this. i think it's one person.

Why can't you see it could be a committee? If more than one person has access to the chesslover handle, they wouldn't even have to bother reading chesslover's other posts. They certainly wouldn't have (and haven't) bothered to keep chesslover's posts consistent.

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 08:14 PM
Yes that is your personal opinion. Why don't you concentrate on your chess instead of being too harsh on poor Jose

I think the opposite of you. I think that poor Jose has been victimised and been the subject of a lot of harrassment by organsiers and DOPs. I know for a fact that whenever he plays the opponents and the organisers are itching to kick him out. It seems that that is how they measure their toughness

And the fuss and warning letter for me wearing the earphones and listening to music was just stupid. Anyone is entitled to wear earphones and listen to music to shut out the noise yet until Jose did so no one cared so much about it.

And do you think that if it was YOU that went so close to qualifying for the World Champs KO that you would have had so much scrutiny. The fuss that was made and allegations that he was cheating was made well before he was even forced to confess it. He shoudl have deny deny deny and threaten legal action like a couple of others did in the Zonal.

Even parr said that the game was rigged and he quoted the moves of teh game and showed how that had been played a long time before and yet nothing happened. One of these people like poor honest Jose confessed yet it was only me that was branded a cheat. WHY?

People shpould not ne so nasty to Jose. he is a wonderful and kind human being and unless a person walks in anothers shoe they do not know about that person

None of this should be interpreted as meaning that I am Jose or Jose is me. I am just a close friend of his that feels very upset when he is attacked unfairly.This is not a red herring a confession.
You poor stupid goose.
Continuing to interchange the use of "I", "he" and "jose" does nothing to quell speculation.
It does you no good.

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 08:17 PM
It doesn't require anyone who is clever. It just takes more than one person. As far as I know, Ian Rout was the first to suggest this, but apart from me no-one seems to be giving this much credence? It could be that one or more of the people involved don't even post to the forum themselves, but email their posts to someone else who posts them under chesslover's handle.

This way all the apparent inconsistencies in biographical information are explained (of course, they could just be lies anyway).

Anyway, I now know two of the people involved in the chesslover scam, and am fairly sure of a third.
Well Greg, we spoke about this at the City of Sydney yesterday, so you know my view.

I cannot believe these geese could be so clever to have contemplated this plan back in march 2003 when CL first started posting on tghe old ACF BB.

Of course I'm quite prepared to be proven wrong. ;)

Alan Shore
29-03-2004, 08:17 PM
And the fuss and warning letter for me wearing the earphones and listening to music was just stupid. Anyone is entitled to wear earphones and listen to music to shut out the noise yet until Jose did so no one cared so much about it.

None of this should be interpreted as meaning that I am Jose or Jose is me..

If so, then why do you keep making these ridiculous identity errors?

P.S. though, I think headphones should be allowed - who was the gimp who said they weren't?

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 08:19 PM
Yesterday, CL was the talk of the tournament. And it appears that we have another candidate as to who he might be. I can announce to all that this new candidate is definitely not chesslover.

AR

What you mean to say of course, Amiel, is "this new candidate is definitely not 100% chesslover", although he may well be part of the hoax.

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 08:25 PM
P.S. though, I think headphones should be allowed - who was the gimp who said they weren't?
if i remember the debate and comments on here previously, it was a decision by the nswca council of 2003

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 08:28 PM
P.S. though, I think headphones should be allowed - who was the gimp who said they weren't?

Although I was not in any way involved in the headphones fracas, it doesn't surprise me that Escribano was not allowed to wear them. He is a known cheat when it comes to using technology in chess tournaments.

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 08:29 PM
Although I was not in any way involved in the headphones fracas, it doesn't surprise me that Escribano was not allowed to wear them. He is a known cheat when it comes to using technology in chess tournaments.
this is a big call greg, i hope you have more than just inneundo to back it up

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 08:34 PM
this is a big call greg, i hope you have more than just inneundo to back it up

He was disqualified from an online tournament that was a qualifier for the World Championship (a really stupid idea by Fide in the first place) for using Fritz, even though it was expressly stated that it was illegal to use engines. There is no innuendo here.

chesslover
29-03-2004, 08:34 PM
No Gregyou are Wrong as in W-R-O-N-G

You were a great player when you won successive titles but now your BB skills are as pathetic as your chess

Jose is not a cheat and he is a fine decent and wonderful human being

You just have no clue and my heart bleeds for the cynicism and cruelty and bias that Jose has had to face throughout his chess career

It is because oif this that when he coems out with brilliant ideas for chess in NSW and Australia no one listens. They have prejudged him and found him guilty

and who loses. Australian chess and it serves us right.

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 08:37 PM
No Gregyou are Wrong as in W-R-O-N-G

You were a great player when you won successive titles but now your BB skills are as pathetic as your chess

Jose is not a cheat and he is a fine decent and wonderful human being

You just have no clue and my heart bleeds for the cynicism and cruelty and bias that Jose has had to face throughout his chess career

It is because oif this that when he coems out with brilliant ideas for chess in NSW and Australia no one listens. They have prejudged him and found him guilty

and who loses. Australian chess and it serves us right.

are you going to answer greg's claims cl?

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 08:40 PM
Yesterday, CL was the talk of the tournament. And it appears that we have another candidate as to who he might be. I can announce to all that this new candidate is definitely not chesslover.

AR
I assume you are referring to RB.

chesslover
29-03-2004, 08:46 PM
He was disqualified from an online tournament that was a qualifier for the World Championship (a really stupid idea by Fide in the first place) for using Fritz, even though it was expressly stated that it was illegal to use engines. There is no innuendo here.

and why did you not give it a go????

Jose did,

He dares to dream and dream big unlike the small people in the chess scene. He has ambition and is like an eagle stuck among chickens and who yearns to soar and better himself

he is an antiestablishment common man who is one of us. he is the common man Matt Sweeney was looking for

he also was not 100% proven to be using technology to aid him.Sure he confessed but so what? what does that mean? was that admission a sign of guilt or a sign of someone who was under so much stress and turmoil that he would have said anything to stop the Spanish Inquisition that the Australian chess authorities turned on him?

Think about that and dont discount it. In many parts of the world innocent men confess. Even in Australia and USA innocent men have confessed and been found guilty

So please do not be quick to rush in and condemn him without knowing the full circumsatnces about the whole qualifiers

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 08:48 PM
P.S. In the NSW Championship of 2001, Escribano was accused of playing a move, pressing the clock, then playing a completely different move right in front of his opponent. The only witness didn't appear to know what was going on, so the arbiter ordered the game be continued (Escribano lost anyway). The opponent was extremely upset with Escribano and the arbiter and yelled such vicous and nasty personal insults that caused him to (rightfully) be expelled from the tournament. Escribano later expressed amusement at the whole incident and even admitted to the arbiter that he had violated the touch move law and had taken back the move.

The arbiter, of course, had no alternative but to expel him from the tournament as well.

Do you want any more examples, gg? I have plenty, although I'm sure some of the arbiters have many more, if they could be bothered going through them all again.

Alan Shore
29-03-2004, 08:53 PM
if i remember the debate and comments on here previously, it was a decision by the nswca council of 2003

ffs, where's the liberty gone? If I was a NSW player I'd be incredibly miffed at that poor decision. It's going way too far - I personally prefer not to wear headphones but I have in the past, and I defend the right of those who wish to. Appalling I say!

1/ There's nothing in the Laws of chess about headphones
2/ If a player wears headphones and is accused of using computer assistance, then I think he should submit his games for analysis if the DOP asks.
3/ WHO WAS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE? Who brought up this suggestion at the Council meeting? I want this ridiculous rule overturned and the goose who brought it up to attempt to justify it. :hand:

What next? Banning thongs because of smelly feet? Requiring Matthew to wash his hands before shaking his opponent's hands? No long hair permitted because there might be a pocket fritz hidden in there? No swinging on your chair? No tapping of feet, No hands on your head, no dessert until you eat your vegetables, no pancakes on wednesday, no wheelchair access, no unshaven faces, no saying check, no clearing your throat, no arguments, no talking and absolutely, positively, no questioning of the rules.


Gits.

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 08:53 PM
Do you want any more examples, gg? I have plenty, although I'm sure some of the arbiters have many more, if they could be bothered going through them all again.

its alright greg actually, im not really concerned if jose is a bad person with bad character or not. I am getting more convinced that cl is jose from here cause i dont understand how cl can say with such conviction that jose is a nice person and hasnt done anything wrong unless cl knows first hand what jose is like because cl is jose :lol: :p ;)

Btw where is jase when you need him :lol: :lol: :owned: :owned:

chesslover
29-03-2004, 08:56 PM
its alright greg actually, im not really concerned if jose is a bad person with bad character or not. I am getting more convinced that cl is jose from here cause i dont understand how cl can say with such conviction that jose is a nice person and hasnt done anything wrong unless cl knows first hand what jose is like because cl is jose :lol: :p ;)

Btw where is jase when you need him :lol: :lol: :owned: :owned:

I am not Jose and Jose is not me

If pwoplw think that they are falling for red herrings

I am just a friend of his that is all

PHAT
29-03-2004, 08:59 PM
Try this on. Greg Canfell = chesslover.

Sometimes, some wording, the style, a je ne sequa, leaks through.

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 09:07 PM
ffs, where's the liberty gone? If I was a NSW player I'd be incredibly miffed at that poor decision. It's going way too far - I personally prefer not to wear headphones but I have in the past, and I defend the right of those who wish to. Appalling I say!

1/ There's nothing in the Laws of chess about headphones
2/ If a player wears headphones and is accused of using computer assistance, then I think he should submit his games for analysis if the DOP asks.
3/ WHO WAS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE? Who brought up this suggestion at the Council meeting? I want this ridiculous rule overturned and the goose who brought it up to attempt to justify it. :hand:
Actually if I recall correctly the ban is on portable music devices etc.

Numerous players complained over a number of tournaments.
They complained because the music being played could be heard.
The arbiters referred to the complaints in their reports to council.
The arbiters recommended banning such devices.

Headphones that do not incorporate inbuilt music devices or radios or those that are used without being physically connected to a portable device should be ok.


What next? Banning thongs because of smelly feet? Requiring Matthew to wash his hands before shaking his opponent's hands? No long hair permitted because there might be a pocket fritz hidden in there? No swinging on your chair? No tapping of feet, No hands on your head, no dessert until you eat your vegetables, no pancakes on wednesday, no wheelchair access, no unshaven faces, no saying check, no clearing your throat, no arguments, no talking and absolutely, positively, no questioning of the rules.
Any behaviour that can disturb your opponent can essentially be ruled illegal by the arbiter.



Gits.
All I see is a goose.

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 09:07 PM
and why did you not give it a go????


To be honest, I didn't even know about the tournament until after it had happened. The chess press obviously thought it was such a stupid idea they didn't bother promoting it.

he also was not 100% proven to be using technology to aid him.Sure he confessed but so what? what does that mean? was that admission a sign of guilt or a sign of someone who was under so much stress and turmoil that he would have said anything to stop the Spanish Inquisition that the Australian chess authorities turned on him?
Yes, next they were going to force you to scream: I AM JOSE ESCRIBANO. :p

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 09:13 PM
P.S. In the NSW Championship of 2001, Escribano was accused of playing a move, pressing the clock, then playing a completely different move right in front of his opponent. The only witness didn't appear to know what was going on, so the arbiter ordered the game be continued (Escribano lost anyway). The opponent was extremely upset with Escribano and the arbiter and yelled such vicous and nasty personal insults that caused him to (rightfully) be expelled from the tournament. Escribano later expressed amusement at the whole incident and even admitted to the arbiter that he had violated the touch move law and had taken back the move.

The arbiter, of course, had no alternative but to expel him from the tournament as well.

Do you want any more examples, gg? I have plenty, although I'm sure some of the arbiters have many more, if they could be bothered going through them all again.
As you stated the arbiter expelled Jose's opponent for the reasons you gave. The NSWCA Council supported the arbiters decision. There were no votes against the motion but there were 2 abstentions.
If I recall correctly the arbiter did not expel Jose, the NSWCA Council did by unanimous vote.

chesslover
29-03-2004, 09:15 PM
P.S. In the NSW Championship of 2001, Escribano was accused of playing a move, pressing the clock, then playing a completely different move right in front of his opponent. The only witness didn't appear to know what was going on, so the arbiter ordered the game be continued (Escribano lost anyway). The opponent was extremely upset with Escribano and the arbiter and yelled such vicous and nasty personal insults that caused him to (rightfully) be expelled from the tournament. Escribano later expressed amusement at the whole incident and even admitted to the arbiter that he had violated the touch move law and had taken back the move.

The arbiter, of course, had no alternative but to expel him from the tournament as well.



and what does this reveal???

Jose got away with it and yet confesses to the DOP that he did wrong even when he had no reason to do that.

It shows that there beats a warm caring human heart breneath that gruff exterior. It shows that in the end when push comes to shove Jose has a sense of right and wrong. It shows that Jose is a man of morals and will not profit from ill gotten gains.

he may push the boundry but then if humans did not push the boundries we would never have gotten off the branches of our evolutionary past

This example plus the confession about the KO shows that when confronted or when asked a question Jose will tell you the truth. That is in chracter for him and for that he is to be admired. He does not deny deny deny ask ask them to prove their case but admits it from a sense of decency and personal self responsibility

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 09:15 PM
Try this on. Greg Canfell = chesslover.

Sometimes, some wording, the style, a je ne sequa, leaks through.

Ahh, very asuming Matt, sometimes you crock me up.

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 09:18 PM
and what does this reveal???

Jose got away with it and yet confesses to the DOP that he did wrong even when he had no reason to do that.

It shows that there beats a warm caring human heart breneath that gruff exterior. It shows that in the end when push comes to shove Jose has a sense of right and wrong. It shows that Jose is a man of morals and will not profit from ill gotten gains.

he may push the boundry but then if humans did not push the boundries we would never have gotten off the branches of our evolutionary past

This example plus the confession about the KO shows that when confronted or when asked a question Jose will tell you the truth. That is in chracter for him and for that he is to be admired. He does not deny deny deny ask ask them to prove their case but admits it from a sense of decency and personal self responsibility
if jose had any decency in this scenario he would not have retracted his move in the first place. when he did retract his move, when he did retract his move and was confronted by the arbiter, if he had any decency he would have said yes i did retract my move, then apologise.

eclectic
29-03-2004, 09:22 PM
I am not Jose and Jose is not me

If pwoplw think that they are falling for red herrings

I am just a friend of his that is all

I can imagine The Panel (Sitch, Cilauro, Gleisner, Robbins, Langbroek etc) having an in depth discussion one Wednesday evening on the Ten Network about who this mysterious chesslover might be ... :hmm:

(However I'm not sure if it is actually returning so CL may be spared that)

;)

eclectic

Bill Gletsos
29-03-2004, 09:24 PM
and what does this reveal???

Jose got away with it and yet confesses to the DOP that he did wrong even when he had no reason to do that.

It shows that there beats a warm caring human heart breneath that gruff exterior. It shows that in the end when push comes to shove Jose has a sense of right and wrong. It shows that Jose is a man of morals and will not profit from ill gotten gains.

he may push the boundry but then if humans did not push the boundries we would never have gotten off the branches of our evolutionary past

This example plus the confession about the KO shows that when confronted or when asked a question Jose will tell you the truth. That is in chracter for him and for that he is to be admired. He does not deny deny deny ask ask them to prove their case but admits it from a sense of decency and personal self responsibility
This whole post is so utterly stupid it does not deserve an response.
However since it gives me another opportunity to call you a goose I will. :owned:

If Jose had been everything you claim he is then he would not have needed to be confronted by the DOP, he would have quite simply admitted to the arbiter originally during the game that he had touched the piece, instead of vehmently denying it. The fact he didnt admit it says heaps about his character.

chesslover
29-03-2004, 09:38 PM
if jose had any decency in this scenario he would not have retracted his move in the first place. when he did retract his move, when he did retract his move and was confronted by the arbiter, if he had any decency he would have said yes i did retract my move, then apologise.

are you a behavioural psychiatrist???

NO

So how can you make a conclusion of motive from an action

Normally when someone did something wrong they do it for personal profit or to prove a point. Then when they are accused they can admit it or deny it.

If they deny it and there is no way they can be caught then they are scot free

But then why does the person confess when they are scotfree?????

Because of the inherent decency and the fdact that they were not doing it for personal profit

For all you know Jose could have been proving a point and then admitting after he got scott free that he did the thing

This shows that he is a misudnerstood person who is performing psychological tests and behaviour studies on the chess people.

Alan Shore
29-03-2004, 09:41 PM
Whatever Bill - it's still incredibly weak and surely won't be implemented in any other state with people on its council that don't cave into whinging.

chesslover
29-03-2004, 09:49 PM
This whole post is so utterly stupid it does not deserve an response.
However since it gives me another opportunity to call you a goose I will. :owned:

If Jose had been everything you claim he is then he would not have needed to be confronted by the DOP, he would have quite simply admitted to the arbiter originally during the game that he had touched the piece, instead of vehmently denying it. The fact he didnt admit it says heaps about his character.

Rubbish. What utter rot you talk

You of all people know that there is a concept of testing. You do what is wrong to test if the others will pick it up so that you can test the boundries and limitation of what is there

That is why in the US they hire people to actually break into the computer systems of the organisation just so that they can see where the weaknesses are

Similarly for all you know Jose vcould also be testing the chess adminsitrators and DOPs as part of an experiment. Think about this very carefully before you answer. Put your conservative scepticism aside as you mull this over

Jose regularly pushes the boundries. Why??? Could it not be that he has a pionering spirit that wants to test the limits of the rules. You are a space junlie. why does man want to go to space when he can stay at earth? that is jose too. he is a spaceman an explorer a pioneer in a world full of conservative establishment elites.

Also his behaviour to deny when he did "wrong" could be looked as part of this boundry limit testing. He is seeing if the current laws and rules stop him from doing something that is wrong and then discover that.

His attempts at the World Champ Ko can be seen in that light. Lot of people scoffed at it but only Jose went ahead and showed that all sorts of loopholes exist. Indeed were it not for the negatve passion that he aroused he would have got away with it and showed the loopholes that exist.

And finally after he was in the clear and his denials and experimental testing has showsn that he has got away with it why did he confess? why ? why??? why?????

because he did not want to profit from these activities. he had done it and showed the weakness and was just testing the system

A man like that in some parts of the world would be praised and admired for his innovative thinking and for pushing the boundries. But here he is crucified and blasted and treated with derision.

When I think of that I get so very angry and my heart is full of sadness and grief that he could be treated so.

There are many sides to a story and people are listening to just one. Open your eyes open your hearts and think laterally

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 09:51 PM
Whatever Bill - it's still incredibly weak and surely won't be implemented in any other state with people on its council that don't cave into whinging.

So Bruce, are you saying that if you could hear the bass from some crappy heavy metal band coming out of the headphones of your opponent's walkman, that would not bother you?

I thought the NSWCA Council decided to kill two birds with one stone by preventing this as an avenue for technology cheats also.

chesslover
29-03-2004, 09:53 PM
Whatever Bill - it's still incredibly weak and surely won't be implemented in any other state with people on its council that don't cave into whinging.
thank YOU

That is exactly what I said too but people do not listen when their eyes are blind and their ears are shut and their hearts are closed.

That was a silly law then and a silly law now and will be a silly law in the future.

Weak and pathetic then, weak and pathetic now and weak and pathetic in the future

next AGM we should have a motion that prevents the establishment from infringing on our civil liberties and democratic rights. Will you help move the motion or second it ????

Rincewind
29-03-2004, 09:54 PM
Whatever Bill - it's still incredibly weak and surely won't be implemented in any other state with people on its council that don't cave into whinging.

I disagree. I think there should be a ban on all electronic equipment in the playing area unless it is serving some medical purpose (e.g. hearing aid, pace-maker, etc) or the Arbiter provides a special dispensation on a case by case basis (e.g. pager (set to silent) for a doctor on call should be the yardstick).

I think even headphones with no apparent electronic devices should be carefully inspected by the arbiter before being allowed to be used.

Just call me a suspicious New South Welshman. ;)

This is purely on the non-cheating level. The disruption that personal music equipment might cause in the playing area is reason enough to ban them for players, arbiters and spectators.

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 09:58 PM
this following post comes from the mark latham is a goose thread.


Typical ohnny-Howard bureaucrat sopeak from Chesslover, qyuoted straught from the Daily Tele, what a surprise Jose!


You have no RIGHT to reveal my identity. You have ABUSED power to expose me and I protest formally and seriously. This is a breach of webmasters duty

I am very disapointed at you for divulging information tyhat was revealed in personal circumstances and will never ever reply to you again :mad:

You have sunk very low in my esteem and opinion and I hope that when they round up the loony socialists that you are put away for ever

oh well the mystery is over, thanks cl/jose. no need to hide anymore ;)

Alan Shore
29-03-2004, 09:59 PM
So Bruce, are you saying that if you could hear the bass from some crappy heavy metal band coming out of the headphones of your opponent's walkman, that would not bother you?

I thought the NSWCA Council decided to kill two birds with one stone by preventing this as an avenue for technology cheats also.

I take it that's insulting my name, very funny... :hand:

Greg, did you ever consider asking said party to turn their music down a little? Headphones are after all, designed for PERSONAL USE - that's why they exist. If I was using headphones I would certainly be unaware anyone else would be hearing the music and would gladly comply to turn it down. Banning it completely? COMPLETELY OVER THE TOP AND UNJUSTIFIED.

I already came up with a solution for computer use - even so, name me one person in Australian Chess who has ever been suspected of this?

I can hear the tumbleweeds blowing...

Garvinator
29-03-2004, 09:59 PM
I disagree. I think there should be a ban on all electronic equipment in the playing area unless it is serving some medical purpose (e.g. hearing aid, pace-maker, etc) or the Arbiter provides a special dispensation on a case by case basis (e.g. pager (set to silent) for a doctor on call should be the yardstick).
unless for the reason stated above, there is no need to wear head phones, i wear ear plugs and they do they job very well of blocking out noise.

Rhubarb
29-03-2004, 10:01 PM
its alright greg actually, im not really concerned if jose is a bad person with bad character or not. I am getting more convinced that cl is jose from here cause i dont understand how cl can say with such conviction that jose is a nice person and hasnt done anything wrong unless cl knows first hand what jose is like because cl is jose :lol: :p ;)

Btw where is jase when you need him :lol: :lol: :owned: :owned:

Relating incidents that illustrate Escribano's character also has the effect of chesslover coming to his defence in an ever-more ridiculous fashion.

jase and jose? There's only one character difference, but what a difference that character makes.