PDA

View Full Version : Posting styles of various posters



Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 07:46 PM
Note: I have copied this from the Mt Buller threads because at least one person wanted to comment over here and not in the on-topic section. However some people involved don't intend to comment further about it over here, so don't read anything into it if they don't participate.


Probably thereís at least one person whoís been wondering why I havenít responded to a couple of (perfectly reasonable) questions posed by Bill a few pages ago.

I will be blunt: I am sick of Billís CONSISTENTLY boorish behavior and refuse to have anything to do with him here. I am not in a club of one in taking a position like this (Robert Jamieson is another one in recent memory, but I am aware of several more). You canít argue with Bill any more than you can argue with God, and I am NOT saying that Billís a skilled arguer. Billís not always wrong either, but thatís beyond the point at this stage. Heís generally quite polite in responses to me (which says a lot), but until heís willing to extend the same courtesy to everyone on the BB Ė yep, even the ones he considers Ďmoronsí Ė I wonít have anything to do with him.

However, lest anyone think heís posed me an unanswerable question, Iíll throw this one out to someone else:



Libby, I have some reason to believe that your ACT-based answer to this question might be the same as mine. Why didnít you take action to stop the ACF running into a Ďall or nothingí deal with Mt Buller the first time around?

/jef

PS: OCCASIONAL boorishness I take to be a natural outcome of existing on this BB! :D
PPS: Regarding your question on the last page...yeh you're right Kevin, it's just speculation :)


Good for you.
However werent you the one who started the junior selection thread last year by casting aspersions and claims of bias against certain selectors.


Jammo's lack of posting to me or others does not concern me.
BTW jammo obviously thought Mt. Buller was a good idea because he sent me and others an email prior to the National Conference asking us to support it.


Oh you can argue with me provided you put up valid points and not just idle speculation.


I dont see that as any great loss on my part.


Good for you.
So I'll ask you another question you cannot palm off to others.

Do you have any working arrangement with the guru.


Without wishing to take a stand either way on every comment Bill has ever made to any person I will say this.

Bill puts a lot of work into running the ratings system and does so voluntarily. In this capacity he has been subject to some vitriolic and very headstrong accusations of incompetence over the years on these BBs. Several of these accusations have turned out to be demonstrably false. Many have been made by people too lazy to research the most basic facts about the system (which, I acknowledge, is not straightforward) and some of those accusations have been repeated even after they have been disposed of.

I've been in equivalent situations in my professional life at times, and I know exactly what it is like to have people who are not in that position tell you you should be nice to everyone, no matter how wilfully lazy, ignorant and abusive they may be. You'd have to be both an idealist and a saint to be courteous to them all.

If anyone wants to respond to this in detail I'll copy this and the response(s) to the offtopic section.


Thanks Kevin, I should have made this more clear. I read basically every thread on this BB except for the ones related to ratings squabbles. I've been inside that thread for a few seconds, but it seems to me that D.Richards might be the only person on here with an arguing style just as bad as B.Gletsos's (although rather different). So my comments aren't related to all of that nonsense - I'm referring to everything else.

I have no interest in any contact with B.Gletsos whatsoever, including anything on the non-chess section. Life's too short! As for interested readers wanting to make a judgment, I suggest they just casually browse through the forum (including THAT RATINGS THREAD, although I won't be going near it!).


No, Bill junior. The topic is closed. I think it should stay here as it's a personal post that's related to this thread (hint: read Bill's replies to people besides me earlier in this thread).

Now let's get back to more important business. I will continue to write posts on the Mt Buller issue and Bill will continue to jot down one-line replies. I just want people to know why I'll be ignoring them (regardless of how politely or impolitely they are written).


bill junior, hardly. i thought that title was owned by chesslover
:whistle:


:P Just messin with ya, man!

Garvinator
10-07-2004, 07:55 PM
by jeffrei,

Thanks Kevin, I should have made this more clear. I read basically every thread on this BB except for the ones related to ratings squabbles. I've been inside that thread for a few seconds, but it seems to me that D.Richards might be the only person on here with an arguing style just as bad as B.Gletsos's (although rather different). So my comments aren't related to all of that nonsense - I'm referring to everything else.

I have no interest in any contact with B.Gletsos whatsoever, including anything on the non-chess section. Life's too short! As for interested readers wanting to make a judgment, I suggest they just casually browse through the forum (including THAT RATINGS THREAD, although I won't be going near it!).

my comment was only going to be that i have found bill reasonable to discuss things with when i have debated for or against anything he has said. Bill can be a bit abrupt at time, but that is usually from my reading when posters attempt to make assumptions or speculations and report them as cold hard facts. Then when the claimant poster gets slapped around for doing that, they respond into either off topic comments or making more incorrect claims.

Bill Gletsos
10-07-2004, 08:34 PM
jef obviously saw fit to respond to me when I provided information he wanted for his thread "the list".

I just re-read all my posts in the Mt. Buller - updated ACF Announcement + CALL FOR NEW BIDS thread and basically made 3 types of responses.

1) Answered questions as to the ACF by-laws etc
2) Suggested people stop speculating because they had no facts to work with.
3) Questioned the gurus handling of the whole thing.

On top of this I made one specific comment.
1) I supported Ian Rogers comments when he criticised jef in post #99 of the thread.

I cannot see where I called anyone a cretin, moron or any other disparging remark other than to refer to one poster as a twerp.

I can find no other post where I have antagonised jef.
So it would appear jef has his knickers in a twist because I sided with Ian.

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 10:24 PM
That's ok Paul, you're perfectly entitled to you're view, you don't have to be sorry for that. However, I do take exception to your term 'slanging match'. I may have used the odd metaphor that Bill's found uncomfortable, but the 'slanging' has only ever come from one side. It's a sad way to conduct a debate I agree, but its Bill's way, not mine.

Only a wilfully stupid person, and one far more pedantic than me, would draw any real distinction in civility between Bill calling you a "moron" etc and you suggesting that Bill is "dumb" and gives the impression that he has "the mind of a child", among numerous other personal insults you have employed towards him on the ratings thread.

One distinction between these claims is that whereas your personal insults towards Bill as ratings officer are generally founded on steaming piles of overexcitable ordure, Bill's use of "moron" is arguably derogatory towards people who may well be doing their best with such mental skills as are at their disposal.

This is clearly far more than can be said for you.

:hand:

Cat
10-07-2004, 10:50 PM
Only a wilfully stupid person, and one far more pedantic than me, would draw any real distinction in civility between Bill calling you a "moron" etc and you suggesting that Bill is "dumb" and gives the impression that he has "the mind of a child", among numerous other personal insults you have employed towards him on the ratings thread.

One distinction between these claims is that whereas your personal insults towards Bill as ratings officer are generally founded on steaming piles of overexcitable ordure, Bill's use of "moron" is arguably derogatory towards people who may well be doing their best with such mental skills as are at their disposal.

This is clearly far more than can be said for you.

:hand:

No Kevin, you're being modest, there is none more pedantic than you, I couldn't even come close. I don't ever recall using the word 'dumb', even to you.

If you're suggesting Bill has a modest range of language skills at his disposal, I wouldn't quibble with that. However KB, you must be the biggest time waster on the planet, so much as I would love to lock horns with you, this will be my last entry on this pointless thread.

Kevin Bonham
10-07-2004, 11:21 PM
No Kevin, you're being modest, there is none more pedantic than you, I couldn't even come close.

I only wish the above was true, but we both know it isn't.


I don't ever recall using the word 'dumb', even to you.

Check the thread - you'll find a reply to rob in which you used it.

You can't even discuss your own output without misrepresenting yourself. :wall:


If you're suggesting Bill has a modest range of language skills at his disposal, I wouldn't quibble with that.

I think it's more that he tends to pick a small number of insults and repeat them.

Not too surprising when the material he's responding to is equally repetitive.


However KB, you must be the biggest time waster on the planet,

Coming from you that certainly is a compliment.

I can well imagine how someone engaged in an inflatable red-faced beat-up such as your typical output on ratings, would find it time-consuming to attempt to formulate a response to reasoned argument.

Equally it is understandable that you would view constant intrusions of facts and concepts of methodical soundness into the debate as time-wasting. After all, what does being right matter when you have an agenda to flog?


so much as I would love to lock horns with you, this will be my last entry on this pointless thread.

We shall yet see whether this is one lie or two. :whistle:

Send in the tag-team instead. :lol:

ursogr8
11-07-2004, 07:29 PM
Note: I have copied this from the Mt Buller threads because at least one person wanted to comment over here and not in the on-topic section. However some people involved don't intend to comment further about it over here, so don't read anything into it if they don't participate.

Actually I enjoy Bill's posting style.

I liken it to one of those practice tennis devices with the ball on the rubber-string where you hit the ball, it sails away, and then inevitably it comes back at a different height and/or speed. But it aways comes back.

So, like with the tennis device you can continue discover something about yourself by belting the ball in different ways. If you are too provocative, well Bill gves you a return with interest . If you are too inaccurate then Bill gives you repeated corrections. And if you are reasonable then the ball comes back at the same height and speed.

The ball always comes back, this is a certainty. Not always accurate mind you, but always returned.

If you want to improve your backhand (comments) then Bill should be your poster of choice.
If you want to improve your serve (and a few posters here like Broadz and firegoat like to serve it up) then Bill is your test machine to see if it can be returned.
Just don't double-fault, because then it becomes Bill's turn to serve.

Bill does not like the modern tie-break sets that have crept into tennis, he much prefers to win 26-24 in the fifth set, by attrition.


starter

PHAT
12-07-2004, 08:21 PM
I do nto feel comfi with a thread devoted to a particular BB person's style. I think I have started one my self some where some time ago - prolly about KB, but I shouldn't have.

Kevin Bonham
12-07-2004, 10:50 PM
I do nto feel comfi with a thread devoted to a particular BB person's style. I think I have started one my self some where some time ago - prolly about KB, but I shouldn't have.

I've changed the title, because (i) you're right and (ii) the title no longer accurately describes the contents.

antichrist
13-07-2004, 08:20 PM
A few times on my postings Bill has insultingly shot off is mouth without checking his facts and he has been 100% wrong. He has then shut up without apologising. Otherwise I like him, especially in person as he has the patience to explain some complicated rule fully, very helpful.

arosar
13-07-2004, 08:25 PM
Yeah...well, why we're all happily giving feed back on each other mate, here's one for you Peter. Next time you see me havin' me lunch, I don't wanna bloody see you show me, without me asking you, a picture of a bloodied severed head! Understood?

That was disgusting what you showed mate.

AR

Bill Gletsos
13-07-2004, 08:26 PM
A few times on my postings Bill has insultingly shot off is mouth without checking his facts and he has been 100% wrong. He has then shut up without apologising.
Care to give an example?

ursogr8
14-07-2004, 10:29 AM
Care to give an example?

Bill

Care to explain calling CL a goose?
Or are you just defending a't postings?

starter

Bill Gletsos
14-07-2004, 11:35 AM
Bill

Care to explain calling CL a goose?
I simply started calling CL a goose after Kevin hinted at him being a goose.


Or are you just defending a't postings?
I was however specifically referring to antichrists claims.
I may have had a go at him but I dont remember being in any way wrong. :whistle:

boardumb
14-07-2004, 09:17 PM
well, i don't find this thread particularly interesting, but here's a whole website devoted to forum types.

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html

enjoy :)

ursogr8
06-01-2005, 02:40 PM
Note: I have copied this from the Mt Buller threads because at least one person wanted to comment over here and not in the on-topic section. However some people involved don't intend to comment further about it over here, so don't read anything into it if they don't participate.

I notice quanta made two posts today; and now they have disappeared. I wonder what style we call that?

ursogr8
25-01-2005, 11:39 AM
hi Ring-a Rosie

I notice some of your earlier posts have been deleted. At your instigation or the mods or admin. ?
What's the story mate? (Around 14 November last year).


starter

Bill Gletsos
25-01-2005, 02:06 PM
BTW starter congrats on reaching your 3000th post with the above typical effort. :whistle:

auriga
25-01-2005, 02:42 PM
I notice quanta made two posts today; and now they have disappeared. I wonder what style we call that?

huh. they were there all the time!

ursogr8
25-01-2005, 03:31 PM
BTW starter congrats on reaching your 3000th post with the above typical effort. :whistle:

Thanks Bill
If it wasn't for you and gg'', I wouldn't be here.

starter

Alan Shore
25-01-2005, 03:35 PM
Thanks Bill
If it wasn't for you and gg'', I wouldn't be here.

starter

And a few others I'm sure... :hmm:

ursogr8
25-01-2005, 03:56 PM
And a few others I'm sure... :hmm:

And while you are thinking BD...here is a hint :rolleyes:

Bill 4976
gg'' 3920
starter 3004

Alan Shore
25-01-2005, 04:09 PM
And while you are thinking BD...here is a hint :rolleyes:

Bill 4976
gg'' 3920
starter 3004

Starter you're forgetting the rule:

When you address me, you are to make no reference to postcount.

It's been a while, so perhaps you required the reminder.

ursogr8
25-01-2005, 04:22 PM
Starter you're forgetting the rule:

When you address me, you are to make no reference to postcount.

It's been a while, so perhaps you required the reminder.

Well BD

Bill says I am obsessive on metrics.
gg'' says I am obsessive on post counts.

So, mate, if you hop into a thread called Posting style of posters, then you took a chance.
I mean it is like expecting Baz to pass up one of those religious threads.

starter

ursogr8
25-01-2005, 04:52 PM
Kaitlin's style is like watching....well how do we describe it?
Like no other I have seen.

Rhubarb
26-01-2005, 10:08 AM
Kaitlin's style is like watching....well how do we describe it?
Like no other I have seen. Has the hitherto imperturbable starter been perturbed?


Kaitlin: Quiet. Please.

ursogr8
26-01-2005, 10:32 AM
Has the hitherto imperturbable starter been perturbed?

Definitely pertubed my good correspondent kegless.
Perturbed by the prospect of drawing to the attention of the greatest pair of proof-reading eyes south of the Courier-Mail a possible overlook of his ability.

I invite you to look at the spelling in the SHOUTBOX.

I could point out that it was a joke Joyce, but the little waif, Caketin, has already laughed.


highest esteem for you (in daylight hours)
starter

Rhubarb
27-01-2005, 11:09 AM
I invite you to look at the spelling in the SHOUTBOX.Now look, starter, you know what's going to happen if you start pointing out my errors. For example, I might point out that it is in fact Shoutbox, not SHOUTBOX, and if you wish to emphasise a word you have at your disposal italics, underlining and bolding, not to mention all the colours of the rainbow.

Damn, you know how I hate being one of those goobers (http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/warriorshtm/grammarian.htm).

P.S. I did get your original pun, by the way, just in case that wasn't clear.

ursogr8
27-01-2005, 11:35 AM
Now look, starter, you know what's going to happen if you start pointing out my errors. For example, I might point out that it is in fact Shoutbox, not SHOUTBOX, and if you wish to emphasise a word you have at your disposal italics, underlining and bolding, not to mention all the colours of the rainbow.

Damn, you know how I hate being one of those goobers (http://redwing.hutman.net/%7Emreed/warriorshtm/grammarian.htm).

P.S. I did get your original pun, by the way, just in case that wasn't clear.

I nu it.

I gnu it.

I new it.

I knew it.

I knew I should not have corrected the great corrector.


regards starter

ps
What about you chance it and run the red pencil through one of Caketin's typical posts. Then I will follow-up with metrics on the correct-rate?

ursogr8
31-01-2005, 12:36 PM
hi Baz
Are you there?

You know how you specialise in cliche spotting? There is a bird in the paper this morning, willing to defend the cliche. (Pasted in below).
Do you think she is on the rails Baz? If so, I might climb back on the horse and start to re-use. :uhoh:

regards
starter

When the cat's got your tongue . . .
By Ann Rennie
January 31, 2005

Don't write off the much-maligned cliche. There's life in the old dog yet.

Lost for words? Tongue-tied? Conversationally constrained? Well, help is at hand.

That most maligned of language tools, the cliche, can save you from that gaffe, that gap, that yawning gulf into which words disappear. When your train of thought has been derailed because the cat has got your tongue and your social prospects are going down the drain, in the nick of time, the cliche will save the day.

The cliche is commonly derided as a literary persona non grata, its banality debasing its importance as a part of the bric-a-brac of our living language.

The literati look down their noses at it and English teachers avoid it like the plague. And still it cannot be expunged from daily use. And why should it be? Cliches are a safety net for those who may not be as oratorically ornate as others.

And, when all is said and done they have stood the test of time.

The cliche attracts bad press. It is over-exposed, tired, dull as dishwater; proverbial wisdom gone stale through repetition.

On the other hand, sometimes cliches are the cues for quick understanding, ever-ready responses that break the ice if one does not have the gift of the gab. They can be the distillation of the wisdom of the ages. The fact that a cliche is trite does not lessen its adequacy as a communication aid if other, maybe better, words are not readily available. And cliches are far better than the umming and aahhing.

Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote:

"And when you stick on conversations burrs

Don't strew your pathway with those dreadful urs"

Cliches are a cut above the embarrassing silence or the stammer of stupidity, although babbling like a brook is likely, for the listener, to go in one ear and out the other. Cliches provide a verbal shorthand if the right words are not on the tip of the tongue.

They are passwords. Uttering them gives us access to conversation, to participation and belonging.

Even Oscar Wilde had a good word for cliches and platitudes. "In modern life nothing produces such an effect as a good platitude. It makes the whole world kin."

Sometimes cliches provide the words when others are not there. They are immediately retrievable. They are the common denominators of the language, basics for basic use.

The cliches we use today have been inherited over the centuries. They may have a biblical provenance, "an eye for an eye" (Exodus 21), or a Shakespearean heritage, "the time is ripe" (Henry IV, Part 1). They may have come to use from European mythology (Achilles heel) or have simply been passed down through the ages by word of mouth.

Cliches can achieve longevity because they crystallise a truism. Sometimes they are evanescent, lexicological graffiti painted over by the next generation of cliche coiners. They live but briefly, the flotsam and jetsam of popular culture.

Australian cliches and colloquialisms are very much part of our vernacular. We can have "Buckley's chance", "more front than Myers" or be "as game as Ned Kelly". We can be "a chop short of a barbecue" or "as Australian as a meat pie".

Even Blind Freddie can see that the facilitating use of a cliche is "better than a poke in the eye with a short stick" if you're lost for words.

Cliches have generally been described as hackneyed or platitudinous phrases or opinions. This denigrates their importance. We cannot edit our speech so the cliche is often an in situ communicator that enables us to "get the picture", be "on the same page" or "cut to the chase".

Contemporary cliches are now engendered by space age and military technology. Film, television and video also contribute to cliche currency.

Cliches are often user-friendly and once widely verbalised can enter the language permanently. Already "the coalition of the willing" looks ready to run and run and "ground zero" has lost a little of its apocalyptic flavour through over-exposure in the tabloids. The "sound and fury" of the past now seems to be the "shock and awe" of the present.

And who knows what future generations will make of "wardrobe malfunction"? Maybe it will eventually attain the same whimsical sartorial nonsense as "neat as a pin".

Cliches are the unloved servants of the language; dressed not in glittering erudition, but comfortably attired in repetition and common parlance.

Somerset Maugham wrote that "music hall songs provide the dull with wit just as proverbs provide them with wisdom".

Well, cliches can help us out of those awful verbal vacuums. They may be literary lowbrows, the poor relations (with purple prose) of the language, but, at the end of the day, they certainly keep us talking.

Ann Rennie is a Melbourne writer and teacher. The AGE

Rincewind
31-01-2005, 02:01 PM
There is a bird in the paper this morning, willing to defend the cliche. (Pasted in below).
Do you think she is on the rails Baz? If so, I might climb back on the horse and start to re-use.

She draws a long bow, tarring the colloquialism with the same brush as a cliche. My advice? Stick to what you know.

ursogr8
31-01-2005, 02:18 PM
^
Is that really good advice Baz?

ursogr8
02-02-2005, 12:29 PM
Has the hitherto imperturbable starter been perturbed?

Definitely perturbed now that I have been treated roughly in the Shoutbox. ;) ....by "Caketin".

Listen Greg, you don't think Kaitlin could be her real name do you.......I thought it was just her mother's spelling error. :uhoh:
Did you notice her invitation to play a correspondence game (pasted in below because you are off kicking Kiwis at the moment). It might be worth accepting the challenge just for the joy of reading her daily annotations.

starter


If anyone wants to play a correspondence match then as your opponent you could consider....

:classic: me me me, pik moi :classic:

Sometimes I will be able to play a move a day but not always like for the end of this week or the weekend, but most of the time I will.

I tossed a Tasso (cause I couldn't find a coin, its a bit like a coin and it was fair ahywho cause it came up tails) so you can go white if want and put your move if you want to play.

:) :)

ps. In case any very very very very good players read this you should know at the start Im not very very good (yet), sometimes I still make silly moves but in corrospondence games you have to think lots more so thats good casue sometimes I see its a silly move before I post it. This will be my second corro match and my record so far is "Me v's (the late) Woodstocker" - result DNF. Oh and I play by putting the moves on my glass chess board in my room and look at them when I go pass or sometimes when I wake up or if im just reluxing, and think of my move by doing that.

pss. Dont ever buy one of those glass chess boards, the guys look alright but the board suxs. The black and white squares are too hard to tell apart.. I got a black texter and coloured in the clear squares from the back so now there is black and frosted squares.. so at least now you can tell the difference.

Kaitlin
02-02-2005, 02:56 PM
From shoutbox today [02-02-2005 01:31 PM] "starter: > Caketin...response is where it should be."

..so's my response right where it should be ---> :buttkick:..... right where i was aiming hehe :silly: (wait you got me off topic :shocked: mm to correct I will add that your posting style is incitive and foment - there bak on topic :classic:

Rhubarb
09-02-2005, 11:36 AM
Definitely perturbed now that I have been treated roughly in the Shoutbox. ;) ....by "Caketin".

I see that STML has now fully restored the shoutbox history (thus cutting short Bill's schadenfreude), so I look forward to reading your treatment at the hands of the inestimable Kaitlin at my leisure.


Listen Greg, you don't think Kaitlin could be her real name do you.......I thought it was just her mother's spelling error. :uhoh: Actually, I've been working on a theory for some time now as to her true identity - someone well known to all of us.



Did you notice her invitation to play a correspondence game (pasted in below because you are off kicking Kiwis at the moment). It might be worth accepting the challenge just for the joy of reading her daily annotations.

starter

While it is certainly a peculiar pleasure to read Kaitlin's oeuvre, I fear that it would be counterproductive to my profession to encourage her.

Regards,
kegless

ursogr8
24-03-2005, 08:12 AM
You tease!

First, why is he PMing you re transfer. Does he regard you as my proxy?
Tell the git to post such stuff on the BB, any BB.

Guess the three posters involved in this interchange. :rolleyes: :doh: :) ;)



And if that was too easy...guess the sequence of events.

ursogr8
30-03-2005, 08:00 PM
Rincewind: Well that isn't a very useful hint then, is it?
Baz
Well, no, it wasn't hint at all...hence the wink at the end of the line.
Just a peripheral observation while my brain processes the lines being fed out by JGB.


Looking back at my file of Phil O'Dor posts I notice that he
> said Bill ruined the ratings system
>> Box Hill would run the 2004 VIC OPEN as a mass-involvement low-quality event.


Now, he has not come out and either pursued these contentions, nor recanted.
He seems to have just hit-and-run, a bit like a sniper.
JGB's hints point to a very limited subset of candidates.
Which candidate is likely to exhibit this behaviour? I must admit this question has always been my stumbling block; actually, JGB's candidates have long been somewhat near to my candidates.


starter

JGB
30-03-2005, 09:25 PM
From the information I have given only 1 person remains.

by the way hello DoroPhil... I see you there. ;) Why not tell us who you are!

DoroPhil
30-03-2005, 09:27 PM
Rincewind: Well that isn't a very useful hint then, is it?
Baz
Well, no, it wasn't hint at all...hence the wink at the end of the line.
Just a peripheral observation while my brain processes the lines being fed out by JGB.


Looking back at my file of Phil O'Dor posts I notice that he
> said Bill ruined the ratings system
>> Box Hill would run the 2004 VIC OPEN as a mass-involvement low-quality event.


Now, he has not come out and either pursued these contentions, nor recanted.
He seems to have just hit-and-run, a bit like a sniper.
JGB's hints point to a very limited subset of candidates.
Which candidate is likely to exhibit this behaviour? I must admit this question has always been my stumbling block; actually, JGB's candidates have long been somewhat near to my candidates.


starter

Well, I pretty much stand by everything I said so far. And where are those himts/ observations/ lists of candidates by JGB? Were they moved/ deleted or something?

JGB
30-03-2005, 09:30 PM
Well, I pretty much stand by everything I said so far. And where are those himts/ observations/ lists of candidates by JGB? Were they moved/ deleted or something?

Ill just copy them across form the Shout box...

JGB
30-03-2005, 09:35 PM
Note: Read From Bottom To Top.

JGB 30-03-2005 05:30 PM
I did not say anything about an Autumn cup, just that he was there on this particular Friday and I have heard he often attends Box Hill.
JGB 30-03-2005 04:17 PM
If you don't get lucky with DP try T.L. (say no more, say no more)
JGB 30-03-2005 04:14 PM
Spot on! I met him there the first time I met Starter at Box Hill on a friday night.
JGB 30-03-2005 02:32 PM
"there is another"
starter 30-03-2005 02:28 PM
> 3 times I have given clues in parts. (After I got off calling for a taxi).
Rincewind 30-03-2005 02:03 PM
They are, of course, also the initials of DoroPhil.
Bill Gletsos 30-03-2005 01:38 PM
It also fits in with previous clues that the last Vic Open he played in was at Dandenong.
Rincewind 30-03-2005 01:09 PM
That's who I'm thinking too, based purely on JGB's clues
Bill Gletsos 30-03-2005 01:06 PM
DP?
JGB 30-03-2005 12:50 PM
That he did.
noidea 30-03-2005 12:49 PM
did he give a book to my junior?
JGB 30-03-2005 12:47 PM
Im sure you know who im thinking now. I can't do better than 75%
JGB 30-03-2005 12:38 PM
Finished on 5 points at Ballarat!
JGB 30-03-2005 12:33 PM
MCC also
starter 30-03-2005 12:32 PM
> hmmmm. The trail could be cold?
Bill Gletsos 30-03-2005 12:24 PM
The hints probably mean little to those outside of Victoria
JGB 30-03-2005 12:23 PM
Mid 20's ?
JGB 30-03-2005 12:22 PM
Elwood Ches Club
JGB 30-03-2005 12:22 PM
Was at Ballarat, not at Doeberl.
JGB 30-03-2005 12:22 PM
Box Hill Friday nights.
JGB 30-03-2005 12:22 PM
Im not sure if he wants everyone to know, so im going to drop hints....
starter 30-03-2005 12:20 PM
> JGB...this is enough to attract me to the SHOUTBOX....over to you
JGB 30-03-2005 12:13 PM
I think we have solved the mystery of DoroPhil !!!

DoroPhil
30-03-2005, 09:44 PM
Yeah, I think Mr. Starter in his infinite wisdom did indeed travel down this road before.

Correct me if it's wrong, JGB, but you seem to base your conclusion on who I am based on my comment in the Doeberl thread. Now, info in regards to who stays with Xxxxxxx, is very much... well, you know...

JGB
30-03-2005, 09:50 PM
Yeah, I think Mr. Starter in his infinite wisdom did indeed travel down this road before.

Correct me if it's wrong, JGB, but you seem to base your conclusion on who I am based on my comment in the Doeberl thread. Now, info in regards to who stays with Xxxxxxx, is very much... well, you know...

No I didnt base it on that, well only partially. But your style indicated a lot to me. Although I thought Starter would have picked up on you earlier.

ursogr8
30-03-2005, 10:15 PM
^
^^

JGB
I don't think you have hit the nail on the head yet. Unless you know more.

starter

JGB
30-03-2005, 10:23 PM
JGB
I don't think you have hit the nail on the head yet. Unless you know more.

starter

Perhaps your in operation with Box Hill Agent 99? :whistle:

:cool:

ursogr8
30-03-2005, 10:30 PM
^
You have done good work JGB.

When next we meet I will tell you the anecdote of the drunk who loses his coins (for the bus) in the park.

The noose is tightening........................................ .........maybe.

JGB
31-03-2005, 07:14 PM
^
You have done good work JGB.

When next we meet I will tell you the anecdote of the drunk who loses his coins (for the bus) in the park.

The noose is tightening........................................ .........maybe.


I really do hope DoroPhil returns.
and Starter im looking forward to the anecdote.

ursogr8
03-04-2005, 09:00 AM
a/c

In regard to your PM
No, I don't think you are annoying enough to be banned. The simpler solution is for the MODS to continue to delete the spasmodic posts that are over the line.
starter

ElevatorEscapee
03-04-2005, 10:32 AM
According to an online dictionary, there is no entry for dorophil, however the demophil (also demophile) does exist, meaning 'someone who loves crowds', with the etymology being from the Greek word 'demos' meaning 'crowd'.

Given that the Greek word 'doros' means gift, using the same logic, I think that we can conclude that the word 'dorophil' could be taken to mean someone who loves gifts.

So, all you have to do is give some gifts to the person you suspect of being DoroPhil, and if he likes it, you've got your man. ;)

JGB
03-04-2005, 10:46 AM
So, all you have to do is give some gifts to the person you suspect of being DoroPhil, and if he likes it, you've got your man. ;)

Who doesnt like gifts? :doh:

DoroPhil
03-04-2005, 04:29 PM
Why would I be TL of all people?? JGB, as a mastermind behind that guess, I suggest you explain yourself.

JGB
03-04-2005, 05:05 PM
Why would I be TL of all people?? JGB, as a mastermind behind that guess, I suggest you explain yourself.

Why regarding TL do you say 'of all people'. I find TL to be a nice approachable person. I have stated why I beleive you are TL. It is only for you to dissprove my allegation if you so wish.

ursogr8
05-04-2005, 09:34 AM
From the SHOUTBOX Dorophil
This is my first ever shout. Woohoo! I would like to dedicate it to all the idiots who keep ruining Australian chess. You know who you are. Thank you.

hi Phil O'Dor

Another data-point from you mate. The profile is building up and all assists to the id. revelation. But it is not like you to generalise without the detail. Do you want to expand on your SHOUTBOX one-liner?


starter

ursogr8
12-04-2005, 08:27 AM
Find the metric link between
starter
BD
News Bot

Alan Shore
12-04-2005, 01:48 PM
Find the metric link between
starter
BD
News Bot

Reputation list. Next question.

ursogr8
13-04-2005, 08:28 AM
^^

Correct :clap:

Next question

BD
News Bot
Duff

:uhoh:

Alan Shore
13-04-2005, 01:44 PM
^^

Correct :clap:

Next question

BD
News Bot
Duff

:uhoh:

Starter, the fact you're blowing your own trumpet isn't a good thing.. perhaps you're lucky there's no mechanism for repuation to come down.

Alan Shore
25-10-2005, 03:47 PM
I've noticed 442 never puts a space between a fullstop and the first letter of his next sentence.

four four two
25-10-2005, 04:52 PM
You mean like this?I would say thats my minimalist style.Might be hard for people to read my posts late at night when they are getting sleepy. ;) :whistle:

Rincewind
25-10-2005, 05:28 PM
In an article in this season's Skeptic, Jef Clark relates a story regarding the Review and their failed attempt to reform the English language by taking a minimalist approach to capitalisation and apostrophe punctuation. The following is from a letter to the editor of the Review:

Sir - I note with pleasure the absence of the highly unnecessary apostrophe from Nation review of november 25. I trust that this is only one phase of typographical radicalisation, and offer the following as a short dictation test to enable all steadfast Review-type people to initiate their Review-type child prodigies into the mysteries of these hallowed pages:

"Hell, hell kill me," I could see her thinking as I moved towards her, "Ill be ill if you touch me," she said, "Well, well see about that," I thought. Id liberated her id and shed shed her viginity before wed wed, and I cant stand that sort of cant. "The wanton wench wont as is her wont," I thought dispairingly. I wouldve killed her if I couldve, but if I hadve shedve stabbed me with of her priceless... objet darts. So I didnt.

I trust you will not slacken in your remorseless radical economisations, and that in the near future you will purge the printed page of the filthy dots above the i and j, and will eliminate that other relic of the defecating fly-errant, the comma. University tests prove conclusively that over 98 percent of all sentences, deprived of their commas, are quite intelligible on the third or fourth reading. (Tim Fitzpatrick, Review Letters, Dec 16, 1972)

ursogr8
20-02-2006, 06:56 PM
I've noticed 442 never puts a space between a fullstop and the first letter of his next sentence.

On an unrelated matter, I have noticed that I can be put off by the (aggressive) writing style of some posters but in their small (total) number of posts they may show considerable insight.

starter

raymondsongrock
20-02-2006, 09:09 PM
On an unrelated matter, I have noticed that I can be put off by the (aggressive) writing style of some posters but in their small (total) number of posts they may show considerable insight.

starter

that's because they can refer to the elephant in the room, the thing that everyones thinking about but no one discusses. like how rincewind's obsession with a certain poster wrecks the board for everyone.

Alan Shore
20-02-2006, 09:10 PM
that's because they can refer to the elephant in the room, the thing that everyones thinking about but no one discusses. like how rincewind's obsession with a certain poster wrecks the board for everyone.

I thought that already got discussed... or maybe that was just what some people said to me...

ElevatorEscapee
20-02-2006, 09:20 PM
Is he obsessed with WhiteElephant!? :eek: :P

raymondsongrock
20-02-2006, 09:21 PM
I thought that already got discussed... or maybe that was just what some people said to me...

where was it discussed? it's ridiculous how low he'll go to defend the undefendable if it comes from his girlfriend. jenni, libby, klyall and more. who's next on his hit list?

Rincewind
20-02-2006, 09:22 PM
that's because they can refer to the elephant in the room, the thing that everyones thinking about but no one discusses. like how rincewind's obsession with a certain poster wrecks the board for everyone.

I think your handle detracts somewhat from the point you are trying to make.

raymondsongrock
20-02-2006, 09:26 PM
I think your handle detracts somewhat from the point you are trying to make.

look, in brisbane i thought like you seemed like a decent enough bloke. but you're totally conflicted as a mod here. i think you need to consider quitting. and i'm not in a club of one in thinking that

Rincewind
20-02-2006, 09:29 PM
look, in brisbane i thought like you seemed like a decent enough bloke. but you're totally conflicted as a mod here. i think you need to consider quitting. and i'm not in a club of one in thinking that

And remind me: your opinion matters one iota to me why exactly?

Garvinator
20-02-2006, 09:29 PM
but you're totally conflicted as a mod here.
RW has absolutely no conflicts as a mod here:D

raymondsongrock
20-02-2006, 09:36 PM
And remind me: your opinion matters one iota to me why exactly?

like i said, not just my opinion. i know FOR A FACT that libby thinks the same thing. after this latest incident, probably jenni and klyall too.

Rincewind
20-02-2006, 09:38 PM
like i said, not just my opinion. i know FOR A FACT that libby thinks the same thing. after this latest incident, probably jenni and klyall too.

As I have said, everyone is entitled to an opinion.

raymondsongrock
20-02-2006, 09:47 PM
As I have said, everyone is entitled to an opinion.

well, my opinion is that your obsession with a certain poster clouds heaps of your moderation decisions and drives away decent people like libby from the bb. do you deny that?

Rincewind
20-02-2006, 09:50 PM
well, my opinion is that your obsession with a certain poster clouds heaps of your moderation decisions and drives away decent people like libby from the bb. do you deny that?

I don't deny it is your opinion. It may even be an opinion which is shared by Libby. But Libby's decision to participate in the BB or not is entirely her own. I certainly have made no conscious attempt to drive her away, if that is what you are implying.

Kevin Bonham
21-02-2006, 02:18 AM
look, in brisbane i thought like you seemed like a decent enough bloke. but you're totally conflicted as a mod here. i think you need to consider quitting. and i'm not in a club of one in thinking that

Rincewind's an admin, not a mod. And while I agree that mods and admins alike need to take care of conflicts of interest that may cloud their decisions, the ideal response if they have such conflicts is for them to simply decline to moderate/administrate in those particular instances.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 06:00 AM
Rincewind's an admin, not a mod. And while I agree that mods and admins alike need to take care of conflicts of interest that may cloud their decisions, the ideal response if they have such conflicts is for them to simply decline to moderate/administrate in those particular instances.

Which is what I generally do if time and permits and mods are around. In this case I did not think there was a conflict of interest or that my actions were going to be seen as contentious. Boy was that mistaken. :D

While I was taken to task by Libby and Jenni, this must be tempered with the fact that they are/were both on the organising committee of the event and therefore had their own vested interest in the discussion. The other two from last night were a user who had only posted a couple of times before and a new user. While not necessarily hydrae, it certainly smacks of puppetry of some description.

As I have stated a number of times before I think at least one useful thing was learnt from the whole thing. The rest was just a storm in a teacup and an diversion for a day or two.

Libby
21-02-2006, 06:11 AM
While I was taken to task by Libby and Jenni, this must be tempered with the fact that they are/were both on the organising committee of the event and therefore had their own vested interest in the discussion.

Which possible vested interest is that? I had the same job as Kerry but for the ACT. I am not, and never have been, an organiser of this competition much as efforts have been made by the organisers to involve me further. Jenni's children are not even playing. In my opinion, with which you disagree but that doesn't make your final position, as a consequence, the correct or agreed one (nor mine for that matter) - I think some unfair and untrue accusations were made. The accusatory post was deleted but others made posts in support of it and the accuracy of the claims it contained and I have a problem with that. That's as complicated as it gets for me and a vested interest is not part of the story at all.

There is no conspiracy to "get" someone, nor to exclude any possible participant.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vested interests are people or groups who stand to gain - usually financially - from some policy, often a public policy.

A person can also be said to have a vested interest. For example, a Local Councillor or Member of Parliament may own shares in a company which is being considered for a profitable Public Contract. Elected Representative are usually required to declare all relevant vested interests. Failing to declare any vested interest is seen as corruption.

Libby
21-02-2006, 06:27 AM
BTW - do you yourself have a vested interest you have failed to declare?

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 06:59 AM
BTW - do you yourself have a vested interest you have failed to declare?

I am a friend of Rowena's which is something I have never denied, but I'm also a friend of a number of other posters here including Karthick, Dion, Trent, Matt, Greg, Eclectic, Kaitlin, Gino, Lee, JGB, etc. Are you saying that I should not admin anything anything for any of these people too?

I have no sibling or close relative involved in the the Net champs. Nor am I on the organising committee. Although Alex did briefly discuss some non-specific role with me I declined having any involvement due to a busy schedule.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 07:03 AM
Which possible vested interest is that? I had the same job as Kerry but for the ACT. I am not, and never have been, an organiser of this competition much as efforts have been made by the organisers to involve me further. Jenni's children are not even playing. In my opinion, with which you disagree but that doesn't make your final position, as a consequence, the correct or agreed one (nor mine for that matter) - I think some unfair and untrue accusations were made. The accusatory post was deleted but others made posts in support of it and the accuracy of the claims it contained and I have a problem with that. That's as complicated as it gets for me and a vested interest is not part of the story at all.

There is no conspiracy to "get" someone, nor to exclude any possible participant.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Vested interests are people or groups who stand to gain - usually financially - from some policy, often a public policy.

A person can also be said to have a vested interest. For example, a Local Councillor or Member of Parliament may own shares in a company which is being considered for a profitable Public Contract. Elected Representative are usually required to declare all relevant vested interests. Failing to declare any vested interest is seen as corruption.

You really do read too much into my posts. As an organiser of the event you have a non-financial vested interest in its success. As such it any reaction to criticise of that event (e.g. inequity in who has been offered the opportunity to organise game outside of normal round times, or lack of engagement of parents) is coloured by this interest.

I did not say or imply anything more than this.

JohnH
21-02-2006, 07:13 AM
You really do read too much into my posts. As an organiser of the event you have a non-financial vested interest in its success. As such it any reaction to criticise of that event (e.g. inequity in who has been offered the opportunity to organise game outside of normal round times, or lack of engagement of parents) is coloured by this interest.

I did not say or imply anything more than this.

Too much is not being read into your posts. You clearly referred to potential bias or non- objectivity on the part of Libby and Jenni.

The problem is when your own abilty to be objective is questioned you then become defensive. In fact it may not be a good idea to moderate the posts of friends and leave it up to others.

Your deletion of a friends' post could be seen an an act of protection on your part. It also denies the person referered to in it to a proper response.

For your information I have no 'vested interest'.

If anyone's behaviour is inapproriate, it is yours.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 07:20 AM
Too much is not being read into your posts. You clearly referred to potential bias or non- objectivity on the part of Libby and Jenni.

Yes and as I explained in my post above they have one - although not a financial one. Libby also has a sibling on the ACT team.

JohnH
21-02-2006, 07:23 AM
Yes and as I explained in my post above they have one - although not a financial one. Libby also has a sibling on the ACT team.

Yes and you have a 'vested interest' in the form of a personal one and that still constitutes inappropriate behaviour on your part.

Sort of like the pot calling the kettle black.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 07:26 AM
Yes and you have a 'vested interest' in the form of a personal one and that still constitutes inappropriate behaviour on your part.

Sort of like the pot calling the kettle black.

Not at all. Everyone knows everyone in Australian chess, it is that small. Who exactly do you want as an admin? Someone who knows no one?

Are Libby and Jenni not friends of Kerry?

JohnH
21-02-2006, 07:36 AM
Not at all. Everyone knows everyone in Australian chess, it is that small. Who exactly do you want as an admin? Someone who knows no one?

Are Libby and Jenni not friends of Kerry?

I want someone who is not pompous and considers looking after his friends on the bb as being objective.

Further, your deleting the post was to help a friend and it could be seen as detrimental to others in drafting a public response.

You are not a knight in shining armour, but running with your own 'vested interest'.

Whether Libby or Jenni are friends of Kerry is unknown to me. It is you who have claimed a 'vested interest' on their part and have been unable to subtantiate it it.

It is crystal clear you have a bias and hide behind statements like "Who do you want as an admin". I want people to act as an admin where there is not a clear conflict of interest in their decision making. In your decision and postings your friendship clearly came into the foreground.

I've wasted enough of my time on this already. People can judge for themselves your behaviour.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 07:43 AM
I've wasted enough of my time on this already. People can judge for themselves your behaviour.

Thanks for your insightful opinion piece.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 07:55 AM
For your information I have no 'vested interest'.

As I said before chess is a small community. I rechkon I wouldn't have to scratch the surface too far to find some vested interest for you. Would you like me to try?

JohnH
21-02-2006, 08:09 AM
As I said before chess is a small community. I rechkon I wouldn't have to scratch the surface too far to find some vested interest for you. Would you like me to try?

I'm not going to get involved in a flame war with you.

You're the character going around trying to assassinate peoples' character and I imagine you're pretty good at it.

You made claims of bias and failed to substantiate them. You failed to do so and now try to worm you way out by threatening to attack me.

It is your behaviour that is suspect and you are well aware of it. You are the person who is not objective and attacking others to support your friend. Support you friend if you will, but don't take the high ground by accusing others of running with hidden agendas when you are doing same.

When things don't go quite your way you then throw in a bully threat.


Grow up.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 08:27 AM
When things don't go quite your way you then throw in a bully threat.

Not at all you said "I have no vested interest". I reckon I can think of one. Of course, if you are willing to retract your comment.

JohnH
21-02-2006, 10:02 AM
Not at all you said "I have no vested interest". I reckon I can think of one. Of course, if you are willing to retract your comment.

I am know both Jenni or Libby. Yes I know both of them. I have never met Kerry. I met Rowena briefly. I have never met you.

And don't start telling me who my friends are. I know who they are and you don't.

My child is no long active in chess.

I am on the Council of the NSWJCL.

I get nothing out of this and have no vested interest. Unlike you I am not supporting friends, nor is there any financial gain for me.

Except for you making yourself look stupid there is no payoff.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 10:07 AM
I am know both Jenni or Libby.

You know it is funny how you junior chess admins cannot take criticism. As soon as anyone upsets the apple cart you run to each others assistence so as to not disturb the power balance of the status quo. It's just a joke. If you weren't as a consequence doing junior chess a disservice it would be amusing.

Regarding my role as an admin, the only person whose opinion really matters is Karthick's. He owns the board and is therefore my boss. I suggest if you want to have me removed he is the one you need to convince.

Regarding passing comment on the board I'll make whatever comments I think appropriate. I have no children currently playing organised chess and so the hoards of junior chess admins closing ranks to protect their own doesn't have any effect on me. Sorry.

jenni
21-02-2006, 10:52 AM
While I was taken to task by Libby and Jenni, this must be tempered with the fact that they are/were both on the organising committee of the event and therefore had their own vested interest in the discussion.
.
Since when was I on the organising committee? I wasn't aware that being on a disputes committee meant you were on the organising committee? If it does then I have been on the organising committee of a lot of things that no-one knew about, including the organising committee for the Aus Juniors in WA. :lol:

I have been asked my opinion a number of times by the actual organising commitee, but everyone does that, all over Australia. I am an interfering woman and like to give my opinion and people actually seem to like asking me for it these days (maybe easier than copping a complaint after the event).

So no I am not on the organising committee of either the ACTJCL team or the Alex Saint and Alan Goldsmith thing.

(I thought this was a Victorian problem - not quite sure how it has tranmuted into an Australian issue :eek: )

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 10:59 AM
Since when was I on the organising committee? I wasn't aware that being on a disputes committee meant you were on the organising committee? If it does then I have been on the organising committee of a lot of things that no-one knew about, including the organising committee for the Aus Juniors in WA. :lol:

I have been asked my opinion a number of times by the actual organising commitee, but everyone does that, all over Australia. I am an interfering woman and like to give my opinion and people actually seem to like asking me for it these days (maybe easier than copping a complaint after the event).

So no I am not on the organising committee of either the ACTJCL team or the Alex Saint and Alan Goldsmith thing.

(I thought this was a Victorian problem - not quite sure how it has tranmuted into an Australian issue :eek: )

I stand corrected. Does the phrase "holds an official position in relation to the event" work for you? Is so, we can take that as read.

ursogr8
21-02-2006, 10:59 AM
<snip>

(I thought this was a Victorian problem - not quite sure how it has tranmuted into an Australian issue :eek: )

We had a thread for instances where the typo was actually better than the intended. ;)

Now where was it?

:confused:


starter

Dozy
21-02-2006, 11:05 AM
...You are not a knight in shining armour, but running with your own 'vested interest'...Perhaps not, but I've heard the analogy used in the past to describe RW's defence of Mischa.

RW there's been so much controversy over this that perhaps the post should be restored so we can make up our own minds. It sounds as though Mischa has put her foot in it again but she's a big girl now and she won't learn to keep her fingers off the keyboard if you keep protecting her.

We've all been left to jump to our own conclusions and that's possibly worse than she deserves. Put it back and let us judge for ourselves. :hmm:

jenni
21-02-2006, 11:10 AM
I stand corrected. Does the phrase "holds an official position in relation to the event" work for you?
duh! - so does half of Australia:lol:

Oepty
21-02-2006, 11:16 AM
Jenni. You are also down on the website as being the parent representative, whatever that means.
Scott

Kevin Bonham
21-02-2006, 11:21 AM
For the record I also "hold an official position in relation to the event" as I am on the disputes committee too. Furthermore I was consulted (albeit unofficially) regarding selections for the Tasmanian team.

As far as I can tell this was purely an internal Victorian selections matter involving Mischa and Kerry Lyall. Others having similar roles in other states or other roles with the tournament does not give them a significant conflict of interest - and in any case there is a difference between conflict of interest as concerns a post and conflict of interest as concerns an administration action.

I've read the now-deleted posts by Mischa and klyall and I actually think on the basis of what is there that Mischa had at least one valid point. But I don't agree with her choice of forum to make it in, her manner of phrasing it or her request to have it deleted.

jenni
21-02-2006, 11:24 AM
Jenni. You are also down on the website as being the parent representative, whatever that means.
Scott

oh ok - forgot that one :) It still not organising committee. What it is, is that parents can whinge to me and I pass on the whinges or idea. So just a touchy feely thing where people who are too intimidated by the organising commitee can come to motherly me.

Oepty
21-02-2006, 11:32 AM
For the record I also "hold an official position in relation to the event" as I am on the disputes committee too. Furthermore I was consulted (albeit unofficially) regarding selections for the Tasmanian team.

As far as I can tell this was purely an internal Victorian selections matter involving Mischa and Kerry Lyall. Others having similar roles in other states or other roles with the tournament does not give them a significant conflict of interest - and in any case there is a difference between conflict of interest as concerns a post and conflict of interest as concerns an administration action.

I've read the now-deleted posts by Mischa and klyall and I actually think on the basis of what is there that Mischa had at least one valid point. But I don't agree with her choice of forum to make it in, her manner of phrasing it or her request to have it deleted.

Kevin. Interesting. As the eyes of the organisers on here I have not actually read the post so I am rather blind to what was said. It makes it rather hard for me to post anything.
And while people are declaring their interests/involvement or whatever, I helped Alan select the SA team.
Scott

Oepty
21-02-2006, 11:34 AM
The full list of who is involved in the these internet chess tournaments are available at http://www.ausnetchess.org/aboutus.htm#c Have fun reading it.
Scott

jase
21-02-2006, 11:45 AM
Yes and you have a 'vested interest' in the form of a personal one and that still constitutes inappropriate behaviour on your part.

Sort of like the pot calling the kettle black.

Rincewind's posts on the theme of 'vested interests' and 'double standards' regarding the Internet Junior Champs are the richest pieces of irony I've seen on these fora this year (yes, there are many trashy threads that I avoid ;))

If you're going to Moderate a thread it's beneficial to check your bias at the door. Beyond the matter of thread moderation, Rincewind's posts are so latent with bias that he arguably outdid Lee. The defence so far has been "You are!".

Sorry to have a go at you Barry; I've been biting my tongue since you weighed in on this one because you seem to me like a good bloke; I find your posts on this topic to be so subjective that they are less than constructive.

Libby
21-02-2006, 11:45 AM
Libby also has a sibling on the ACT team.

must be my youthful countenance that led you up this garden path ...

Libby
21-02-2006, 11:59 AM
You know it is funny how you junior chess admins cannot take criticism. As soon as anyone upsets the apple cart you run to each others assistence so as to not disturb the power balance of the status quo. It's just a joke. If you weren't as a consequence doing junior chess a disservice it would be amusing.

Regarding my role as an admin, the only person whose opinion really matters is Karthick's. He owns the board and is therefore my boss. I suggest if you want to have me removed he is the one you need to convince.

Regarding passing comment on the board I'll make whatever comments I think appropriate. I have no children currently playing organised chess and so the hoards of junior chess admins closing ranks to protect their own doesn't have any effect on me. Sorry.

You really do make us seem like a secret society of junior chess admins.

I know who John H is and I think we have probably shaken hands after being introduced.

Kerry & I have enjoyed one or two conversations at the Perth Juniors, at Doeberl 2 years ago and in Brisbane. The substance of which has largely been more of my shocking spruiking of ACT junior chess ideas.

I have no idea who some of the new posters on this issue are and I have not been out garnering their support.

JohnH
21-02-2006, 12:10 PM
You know it is funny how you junior chess admins cannot take criticism. As soon as anyone upsets the apple cart you run to each others assistence so as to not disturb the power balance of the status quo. It's just a joke. If you weren't as a consequence doing junior chess a disservice it would be amusing.

Regarding my role as an admin, the only person whose opinion really matters is Karthick's. He owns the board and is therefore my boss. I suggest if you want to have me removed he is the one you need to convince.

Regarding passing comment on the board I'll make whatever comments I think appropriate. I have no children currently playing organised chess and so the hoards of junior chess admins closing ranks to protect their own doesn't have any effect on me. Sorry.

Your assertion regarding closing of the ranks is totally without foundation.

There's no closing of ranks and you know it. I have no reason to support the ACT junior chess or any other organisation.

I have no reason to defend Jenni or Libby. (They've taken care of you quite effectivley already.)

Unlike you I have no hidden agenda.

You claimed Jenni and Libby had 'vested interests' and couldn't back it up.

Its' you behaviour here that is in question and you know that too.

PHAT
21-02-2006, 12:16 PM
Except for you making yourself [RW] look stupid there is no payoff.

I had a quick look throught your posts. Every time you come here you have only bagged out people. You are so NSWJCL - insular, defensive, malevelant.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:20 PM
must be my youthful countenance that led you up this garden path ...

d'oh, progeny.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:21 PM
You claimed Jenni and Libby had 'vested interests' and couldn't back it up.

I think I have substantiated this.

JohnH
21-02-2006, 12:23 PM
I had a quick look throught your posts. Every time you come here you have only bagged out people. You are so NSWJCL - insular, defensive, malevelant.

No, I took you to task for the false information you and Peter Hanna gave out about the NSWJCL and the NSWCA.

It's a simple as that.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:23 PM
You really do make us seem like a secret society of junior chess admins.

Secret is precisely the wrong word. ;)

JohnH
21-02-2006, 12:24 PM
I think I have substantiated this.

How? By insinuation. You don't know what you're even writing about.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:30 PM
If you're going to Moderate a thread it's beneficial to check your bias at the door. Beyond the matter of thread moderation, Rincewind's posts are so latent with bias that he arguably outdid Lee. The defence so far has been "You are!".

Jase, I really did not think the moderation would cause a problem and I certainly will be more careful in future. But I think the minor storm in a teacup that ensued totally unbalanced with what was removed.

I think what people really disagree with is the opinions I am espressing. In terms of the moderation action I took it that was so minor as to be laughably insignificant.

The issue I see it is the inability of some to admit there was a communication problem in Victoria and also (it appears) in other states which has lead to some comptetitors not taking part when perhaps they might have.

Jenni admitted there was a problem and from memory she is the only one. :clap:

PHAT
21-02-2006, 12:31 PM
There's no closing of ranks and you know it. I have no reason to support the ACT junior chess or any other organisation.

Why then, have you stuck your head up to be kicked. This thread must have more impotance to you, than a hundred threads of weightier moment. The irony is that Blind Freddy can see you are only here to close ranks with your mates - just as you did against Peter and me.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:31 PM
How? By insinuation. You don't know what you're even writing about.

If Kayleigh is playing and Libby was the ACT coordinator for the event how does she NOT have a interest in the success of the thing?

JohnH
21-02-2006, 12:36 PM
If Kayleigh is playing and Libby was the ACT coordinator for the event how does she NOT have a interest in the success of the thing?

I know this will be difficult for you to comprehend so I'll type it slowly. There is a difference between a 'vested interest' and 'interest'. Get it?

JohnH
21-02-2006, 12:38 PM
Why then, have you stuck your head up to be kicked. This thread must have more impotance to you, than a hundred threads of weightier moment. The irony is that Blind Freddy can see you are only here to close ranks with your mates - just as you did against Peter and me.


Your head kick missed. You might be better off posting drunk as usual.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:40 PM
I know this will be difficult for you to comprehend so I'll type it slowly. There is a difference between a 'vested interest' and 'interest'. Get it?

From Merriam-Webster online

vested interest

2 : a special concern or stake in maintaining or influencing a condition, arrangement, or action especially for selfish ends

PHAT
21-02-2006, 12:44 PM
Your head kick missed. You might be better off posting drunk as usual.

It must have been your genitals that I splattered on your collar.

I'm off to have another beer.

JohnH
21-02-2006, 12:51 PM
From Merriam-Webster online

vested interest

2 : a special concern or stake in maintaining or influencing a condition, arrangement, or action especially for selfish ends



Little Oxford English Dictionary

interest

'curosity or attention'.

Would you like pictures instead?

JohnH
21-02-2006, 12:52 PM
It must have been your genitals that I splattered on your collar.

I'm off to have another beer.

No, actually it was the egg you were wiping off your face.

Libby
21-02-2006, 12:53 PM
If Kayleigh is playing and Libby was the ACT coordinator for the event how does she NOT have a interest in the success of the thing?

I would have thought all chess people might have an interest in the success of this competition?

You'll have to explain to me how I have a vested interest when it comes down to the substance of what has been discussed. Maybe I was so fearful of the inclusion of certain players that I colluded to ensure they were disadvantaged & excluded :rolleyes: That would fit nicely into the "it's all about xxxxx .." conspiracy. After all, you know best how I love to chase undeserved titles :eek:

Oepty
21-02-2006, 12:55 PM
From Merriam-Webster online

vested interest

2 : a special concern or stake in maintaining or influencing a condition, arrangement, or action especially for selfish ends

Barry. How does this, or has it in the past applied to Jenni or Libby in regard to the internet competition? Think about it long and hard. I can not see how it does. I cannot see what they have to gain from not having James Morris play in the tournament. Surely if you are arguing about the success or otherwise of the competition then having James play is better than having him not play. I personally would have loved to have him play, but for whatever reason, and I really have no idea what happened, he isn't and this is a pity. Attacking Libby and Jenni and others are not going to help this.
Barry if you, or Mischa, really have a serious concern about the actions of anyone involved with the internet competition please email Alan Goldsmith and/or Alex Saint. If not then I do not see what is being gained by further discussion on the issue on the BB. It does not seem to be achieving anything.
Lastly this is a personal post, not a post on behalf of Alex or Alan in my chesschat liason role.
Scott

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:55 PM
Little Oxford English Dictionary

interest

'curosity or attention'.

Would you like pictures instead?

Kayleigh's involvement alone constitutes a vested interest. Obviously if ACT win it would be to her benefit for the event to maintain maximum prestige and this equates to increase status and prestige for the ACT kids and therefore for Libby's daughter. Any criticism of the event could lower the prestige and there for lower the value of the event as a serious ACF titled championship.

Does that join the dots enough for you?

Alan Shore
21-02-2006, 12:57 PM
Jenni. You are also down on the website as being the parent representative, whatever that means.
Scott

Hey Mr Liason person.. why am I on the games analysis list? I did say I'd be on the disputes comittee and I am, but don't remember agreeing to the other position.. kind of particularly how everyone else in that list is a far better chess player, lol.

(Hey also on that site - 'Libby Smith (one of Australia's top organisers)' ...nice).

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 12:58 PM
Barry if you, or Mischa, really have a serious concern about the actions of anyone involved with the internet competition please email Alan Goldsmith and/or Alex Saint. If not then I do not see what is being gained by further discussion on the issue on the BB. It does not seem to be achieving anything.


Thanks Scott, people keep asking me to justify my posts and so I must reply until their misunderstandings are addressed. Regarding the vested interested see the post above...

Oepty
21-02-2006, 12:59 PM
Hey Mr Liason person.. why am I on the games analysis list? I did say I'd be on the disputes comittee and I am, but don't remember agreeing to the other position.. kind of particularly how everyone else in that list is a far better chess player, lol.

(Hey also on that site - 'Libby Smith (one of Australia's top organisers)' ...nice).

I will ask Alex to remove your name if you wish.
Scott

PHAT
21-02-2006, 12:59 PM
No, actually it was the egg you were wiping off your face.

If you want to play here you need to come up with novel flames - old lines that won't get you a cigar. Lift your game or lift-off at greater than escape velocity.

Alan Shore
21-02-2006, 01:02 PM
I will ask Alex to remove your name if you wish.
Scott

OK, thanks. Just doesn't look right with 'Rogers, Tao, Sampson', haha. :cool:

Libby
21-02-2006, 01:03 PM
Kayleigh's involvement alone constitutes a vested interest. Obviously if ACT win it would be to her benefit for the event to maintain maximum prestige and this equates to increase status and prestige for the ACT kids and therefore for Libby's daughter. Any criticism of the event could lower the prestige and there for lower the value of the event as a serious ACF titled championship.

I see (said the blind man as he walked into the lamp post). So many things I had never considered Barry. thanks for helping me with that, i really appreciate it :wall:

So, ACT might win if players are excluded to our benefit - sorry, probably reading too much into that bit.

So, all of this BB twaddle will grossly undermine a competition to the point that - if we win - our trophies will seem less shiny and we will personally feel more tarnished :confused: Does this argument actually carry weight with you?

This serious ACF Championship seemed to go off very well last Sunday with a few little teething issues. The kids who participated (from the ACT) thought it was fantastic and are all busting to keep going. We've even got 2 deferred games being played tonight, in very cooperative spirit given at least one of our players will have now logged on 3 nights in a row trying to find his opponent. That little glitch has been resolved with some maturity, cooperation and communication. From both parties. Not by ranting here about what all the volunteers are doing wrong.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 01:04 PM
I see (said the blind man as he walked into the lamp post). So many things I had never considered Barry. thanks for helping me with that, i really appreciate it :wall:

Sorry Libby, but John seems a few short.

Libby
21-02-2006, 01:05 PM
Sorry Libby, but John seems a few short.

:doh:

(that's for you Barry)

Libby
21-02-2006, 01:08 PM
(Hey also on that site - 'Libby Smith (one of Australia's top organisers)' ...nice).

Well I didn't put that there. And I'm yet to really organise anything ...

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 01:10 PM
:doh:

(that's for you Barry)

Libby, a vested interest doesn't mean that you have done anything wrong. It is just a potential for a conflict in interest. I have not accused you of any misadministration. Just point out that your criticism of Mischa's criticims needs to be weighed up with all factors in mind.

As I said previously chess is a small community. Almost everyone has a vested interest if look for long enough. Some are large others negligible but they are nearly all there. Like an opinion.

Alan Shore
21-02-2006, 01:10 PM
So, all of this BB twaddle will grossly undermine a competition to the point that - if we win - our trophies will seem less shiny and we will personally feel more tarnished :confused: Does this argument actually carry weight with you?

It doesn't undermine crap all. It's about the achievements of the players only. Anyone who thinks any differently is being a self-righteous ass - nothing is nor should be taken away from the players.

Oepty
21-02-2006, 01:12 PM
OK, thanks. Just doesn't look right with 'Rogers, Tao, Sampson', haha. :cool:

I have emailed Alex.
Scott

Libby
21-02-2006, 01:22 PM
Libby, a vested interest doesn't mean that you have done anything wrong.

No, you were obviously only suggesting it might have coloured my position on all of this. So I either exercised my "vested interest" deliberately or I am unable to identify having done so. Corrupt or stupid - you choose, as you have the same dilemma in my eyes.

I may read too much into your words but you are reading far more into mine. I may require hypnotherapy or past life regression to uncover the subconcious motives you credit me with.


Just point out that your criticism of Mischa's criticims needs to be weighed up with all factors in mind.

And it's very easy, in the absence of that post, to pretend it was all about the one small, justifiable point to be found in it.

I am not against criticism of the processes & procedures of such a first time event. I would expect a fair bit of round-tabling before the year is over to continue to improve what is already a great concept. Let's all see if that post constitutes fair, reasonable & honest criticism of the procedures employed this year in a way that is most likely to achieve the outcome everyone is after.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 01:26 PM
I am not against criticism of the processes & procedures of such a first time event. I would expect a fair bit of round-tabling before the year is over to continue to improve what is already a great concept.

This is my hope too.


Let's all see if that post constitutes fair, reasonable & honest criticism of the procedures employed this year in a way that is most likely to achieve the outcome everyone is after.

What that post did clearly demonstrate is that direct communication to 11 year old juniors without engaging the parent or guardian is a source of misunderstanding. Hopefully this will be taken on board.

Libby
21-02-2006, 01:37 PM
What that post did clearly demonstrate is that direct communication to 11 year old juniors without engaging the parent or guardian is a source of misunderstanding. Hopefully this will be taken on board.

As will the responsibility of others to air their concerns in a more appropriate way in the first instance and not launch into a series of accusations.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 01:48 PM
As will the responsibility of others to air their concerns in a more appropriate way in the first instance and not launch into a series of accusations.

I believe Mischa has apologised for that. However I reiterate if the organisers are relying on 11-year-olds as a part of their communication strategy to the parents then I believe that needs a re-think.

Most of the ensuing flame war was almost entirely unrelated and I think more to do with the way criticism of chess adminstration is handled generally. I've posted more than I have wanted to but felt duty bound to clarify my posts when asked.

As Matt pointed out JohnH not worth worrying about and the two meat puppets from last night were a few rungs below John. However I do regret any offense I may have inadvertantly caused you and Jenni. I still believe you read far too much into my posts, but that is just my opinion.

jenni
21-02-2006, 02:48 PM
Maybe a good post with which to end this little spat...(not that I agree with the comments about JohnH)

Alan Shore
21-02-2006, 02:54 PM
Maybe a good post with which to end this little spat...(not that I agree with the comments about JohnH)

When has John H actually had some positive or insightful comments on this BB though? It seems like he just jumps in when he wants to criticise people. I think we'd take his criticisms more seriously if he actually added something tangible to this board? Until then, he's just a newbie.. but probably not a troll since he doesn't pretend to be anybody he's not.

ursogr8
21-02-2006, 03:00 PM
Maybe a good post with which to end this little spat...(not that I agree with the comments about JohnH)

jenni

Before we do close the curtain, and given that a number of threads are involved, can you point to where Kerry's post appears? That is the one bit I have not read.

regards
starter

jenni
21-02-2006, 03:13 PM
jenni

Before we do close the curtain, and given that a number of threads are involved, can you point to where Kerry's post appears? That is the one bit I have not read.

regards
starter

Stop stirring starter - unless the mods are going to override Barry and bring it back, we are not going to see that one again. (Unless kerry would like to repost it, with James' e-mail bits missing - I think that makes it legitimate). Barry has been rapidly painting himself into a smaller and smaller corner and it probably would be kinder to him to let it rest. I think any rational person would be convinced by now that Kerry made only a tiny error in dealing with James - any organiser makes errors from time to time, particularly when doing too much and trying to juggle family and work. The conspiracy theories that stemmed from that were vintage Mischa and Barry has tied himself in knots trying to justify them. I might be wrong but I don't believe now that anyone believes that either Kerry or Victoria did anything untoward.

arosar
21-02-2006, 03:13 PM
It seems like he just jumps in when he wants to criticise people.

That was also my reaction. He just pops his head in to take pot shots. Then says, he can't be bothered, blah...blah...blah...

It's friggin' cowardly.

AR

jenni
21-02-2006, 03:20 PM
When has John H actually had some positive or insightful comments on this BB though? It seems like he just jumps in when he wants to criticise people. I think we'd take his criticisms more seriously if he actually added something tangible to this board? Until then, he's just a newbie.. but probably not a troll since he doesn't pretend to be anybody he's not.

Oh goodie - we can now start a fight over johnH. :rolleyes:

He is one of the many voyeurs who read this board but doesn't post. You can often see him lurking in the threads. The fact that he doesn't shoot off his mouth on this board doesn't mean he doesn't do worthwhile things and contributes to chess admin.

There are lots of people e.g. Charles Zworestine and Gary Lane who refuse to come anywhere the board and in fact I cop a lot of flak from them about being foolish enough to post here....

It looks to me that he comes in from time to time when he sees some criticisms that he thinks are ultra unfair and comes in for a bit to rebut them.

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 03:34 PM
Stop stirring starter - unless the mods are going to override Barry and bring it back, we are not going to see that one again. (Unless kerry would like to repost it, with James' e-mail bits missing - I think that makes it legitimate). Barry has been rapidly painting himself into a smaller and smaller corner and it probably would be kinder to him to let it rest. I think any rational person would be convinced by now that Kerry made only a tiny error in dealing with James - any organiser makes errors from time to time, particularly when doing too much and trying to juggle family and work. The conspiracy theories that stemmed from that were vintage Mischa and Barry has tied himself in knots trying to justify them. I might be wrong but I don't believe now that anyone believes that either Kerry or Victoria did anything untoward.

Not sure about painting myself into a corner. I have always said that there was most likely a communication issue and I believe that was born out. Most of the painting you perceive is just Libby, et al, straw man positions of my posts which I have hopefully clarified for them when they make their misinterpretations apparent.

Anyway, I'm happy if we agree that everything that can be dealt with has been. Regarding JohnH, I'm sure he is a useful chess admin but on this board he is only one step above a troll. The reasons for this have already been supplied by Belthasar.

If requested, one of the mods should be able to revive Kerry's post with James emails edited out. But please ask nicely I'm sure I have already given them enough work over the last 48 hours. ;)

pax
21-02-2006, 04:08 PM
This serious ACF Championship seemed to go off very well last Sunday with a few little teething issues. The kids who participated (from the ACT) thought it was fantastic and are all busting to keep going. We've even got 2 deferred games being played tonight, in very cooperative spirit given at least one of our players will have now logged on 3 nights in a row trying to find his opponent.

Somehow I get the feeling that Sherab doesn't need too much excuse to play some blitz on ICC :)

Libby
21-02-2006, 04:37 PM
Most of the painting you perceive is just Libby, et al, straw man positions of my posts which I have hopefully clarified for them when they make their misinterpretations apparent.

It must be so much easier to post when one is always so certain of holding the higher ground. You have been very selective in quoting those names you feel have created the "straw men" I spied a few others.

Libby
21-02-2006, 04:40 PM
Somehow I get the feeling that Sherab doesn't need too much excuse to play some blitz on ICC :)

Probably not, but he was actually trying to find his opponent who was supposed to be there on the last two nights.

I can only dream of the drama that could have been avoided if the competition was less flexible and you just played on Sunday or not at all.

It's nice to be accommodating but it ends up creating a lot of extra work (even without all of this ...)

Rincewind
21-02-2006, 04:50 PM
It must be so much easier to post when one is always so certain of holding the higher ground. You have been very selective in quoting those names you feel have created the "straw men" I spied a few others.

I think the thread bears a correct record my posts the misinterpretations and the clarifications. Let history be the judge.

pax
21-02-2006, 05:28 PM
Probably not, but he was actually trying to find his opponent who was supposed to be there on the last two nights.


As I understand it, there was a request made by QLD for a postponement, but this wasn't communicated to ACT. It wasn't a case of the player just not turning up.



I can only dream of the drama that could have been avoided if the competition was less flexible and you just played on Sunday or not at all.


Less hassle for sure, but actually I don't think there has been much 'drama' as you put it (I actually expected a lot more).

jenni
21-02-2006, 05:30 PM
Less hassle for sure, but actually I don't think there has been much 'drama' as you put it (I actually expected a lot more).

Well I think 3 threads is a fair bit of drama. :eek: :lol:

Libby
21-02-2006, 05:34 PM
Well I think 3 threads is a fair bit of drama. :eek: :lol:

Yep - that was the drama I alluded to, not the missed game. There could never have been a question of "failure to inform" although still the vexed "failure to inform parent."

Alan Shore
21-02-2006, 05:47 PM
Oh goodie - we can now start a fight over johnH. :rolleyes:

He is one of the many voyeurs who read this board but doesn't post. You can often see him lurking in the threads. The fact that he doesn't shoot off his mouth on this board doesn't mean he doesn't do worthwhile things and contributes to chess admin.

Au contraire, it seems whenever he does post, all he does is shoot his mouth off!

The fact he contributes plenty to chess admin outside the board is not an issue, I don't doubt it.


There are lots of people e.g. Charles Zworestine and Gary Lane who refuse to come anywhere the board and in fact I cop a lot of flak from them about being foolish enough to post here....

Then they are the fools it seems. You make an effort, they run away from the tough questions. I have much greater respect for you, than them for it.


It looks to me that he comes in from time to time when he sees some criticisms that he thinks are ultra unfair and comes in for a bit to rebut them.

Yes he does - and that's all he does.

bergil
21-02-2006, 06:27 PM
Then they are the fools it seems. You make an effort, they run away from the tough questions. I have much greater respect for you, than them for it.

Why are they fools?

Alan Shore
21-02-2006, 06:38 PM
Why are they fools?

Because they're missing out on the fun of the BB! ;)

ursogr8
21-02-2006, 07:42 PM
Stop stirring starter
Since when is asking to see
a) a list of evidence, and
b) the evidence
stirring?

OK. I can see that I have missed something in all these threads. Can anyone point to a list of poster names that had deleted posts (on this topic obviously).

starter



<snip>

jenni
21-02-2006, 07:45 PM
Since when is asking to see
a) a list of evidence, and
b) the evidence
stirring?

OK. I can see that I have missed something in all these threads. Can anyone point to a list of poster names that had deleted posts (on this topic obviously).

starter



<snip>

Well I have no idea what the definitive list is, but off the top of my head the following posters have had posts deleted

Mischa
Libby
Jenni
Klyall
Dunwannapost
Rincewind
the goat is claiming a deleted post as well. ;)

ursogr8
21-02-2006, 07:53 PM
Well I have no idea what the definitive list is, but off the top of my head the following posters have had posts deleted

Mischa
Libby
Jenni
Klyall
Dunwannapost
Rincewind
the goat is claiming a deleted post as well. ;)

Tks

I can now see it was a bit more that just a repair of 'slips don't count'.

regards
starter

ursogr8
28-02-2006, 02:38 PM
All

Remember the list that kegless and Matt Sweeney used to refer to fairly regularly......sort of a taxonomy of poster types?

Here is a challenge >


Dear David,
I don't think you should set yourself up as an authority on equities if you do not posess the appropriate licences to give such advice. Are you a broker or an advisor? If not whether it be on a private bulletin board or not you should not give such advice unless you are authorizedand/ or licenced.
I work for a company which is listed on the NYSE with operations here in Australia, I know what I am talking about.:hand:
The poster asks a question, but finishes their post with a hand.

:confused:

Anyone remember the link? Or like to have a speculation on the classification type.

regards
starter

Sujakobi
28-02-2006, 04:04 PM
:hand: <<<<<<Is this gesture obscene here?

eclectic
28-02-2006, 04:09 PM
All

Remember the list that kegless and Matt Sweeney used to refer to fairly regularly......sort of a taxonomy of poster types?

Here is a challenge >

The poster asks a question, but finishes their post with a hand.

:confused:

Anyone remember the link? Or like to have a speculation on the classification type.

regards
starter

http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame1.html

:hand: warning! do not feed the troll!!:hand:

;)

four four two
23-03-2006, 11:59 PM
Would someone like to explain how we can have Antichrist and Antichrist the 2nd?:hmm:

Tomas Kessler
24-03-2006, 12:05 AM
Its like that 'Kill, Crush, Destroy' dude on Lost in Space and then later arrives MkII 'Kill, Crush, Destroy' dude.

antichrist
24-03-2006, 12:08 AM
Would someone like to explain how we can have Antichrist and Antichrist the 2nd?:hmm:

Because I could not enter as Antichrist so had to evolve to put up Sydney Easter Cup notice, I am hoping admin will re-open antichrist

four four two
24-03-2006, 12:13 AM
Oh I see,dont you have to email admins to get posting rights reinstated?:hmm:

Liberace came back from being suspended,for awhile...:whistle:

Rincewind
24-03-2006, 12:30 AM
Anti-Christ 2nd merged to antichrist and the antichrist account reinstated.

antichrist
24-03-2006, 12:33 AM
thanks RW

ElevatorEscapee
24-03-2006, 04:40 AM
Wouldn't Antichrist_2ndComing have been a more apt temporary name? ;)

Oepty
27-03-2006, 12:38 PM
Anti-Christ 2nd merged to antichrist and the antichrist account reinstated.

Barry. I didn't realise you could combine accounts. Perhaps I could have my old account and my current one combined.
Scott

Rincewind
27-03-2006, 02:38 PM
Barry. I didn't realise you could combine accounts. Perhaps I could have my old account and my current one combined.
Scott

I probably could. Please PM me with details of the old account.

Oepty
27-03-2006, 03:47 PM
I probably could. Please PM me with details of the old account.

I am not sure I want to, but if I do I will PM you
Scott

Rincewind
27-03-2006, 04:07 PM
I am not sure I want to, but if I do I will PM you
Scott

No problem.

antichrist
27-03-2006, 04:10 PM
I am not sure I want to, but if I do I will PM you
Scott

Can this guy make up his mind on anything, what is name is, is he a male, does the sun rise up in the morning?

Alan Shore
27-03-2006, 05:41 PM
I probably could. Please PM me with details of the old account.

His account is ScottColliver and for goodness sake just do it! ;)

ursogr8
27-03-2006, 07:12 PM
Can this guy make up his mind on anything, what is name is, is he a male, does the sun rise up in the morning?

I really enjoy the posting styles of various posters thread. :uhoh:

It is a place where eccentricities in wording, or humour, of expression, or....various are observed and reported on.

One dimension we have not looked at before is timing. As in "whatever birds it is that return to Capistrano (help me Baz...I only have a dim memory of this phrase).Or, as in "the first swallow Summer".

Timing.
It is all important.

Some things only come out after a good shower of rain. Mushrooms for example.


Timing.


starter

ps Anyone know what the 'Tahs score is on the cross-table?

Rhubarb
27-03-2006, 07:22 PM
ps Anyone know what the 'Tahs score is on the cross-table?That is excellent timing of you to mention that, thank you starter. You've made me feel all guilty about my recent response to you in the shoutbox. Moving over to one of the footy threads now ...

ursogr8
27-03-2006, 07:28 PM
That is excellent timing of you to mention that, thank you starter. You've made me feel all guilty about my recent response to you in the shoutbox. Moving over to one of the footy threads now ...

Greg? Greg?

Is that you?

You have returned to the bb, mate. :clap:
I didn't know...what with all that premium invisibility and other.;)

What a co-incidence.

See you elsewhere.

regards
starter

Rincewind
27-03-2006, 09:55 PM
His account is ScottColliver and for goodness sake just do it! ;)

Perhaps you have a comprehension problem. He didn't ask me to do it. As it is non-reversible I want to make sure what it is exactly he wants doing before I do it.

Alan Shore
27-03-2006, 09:59 PM
Perhaps you have a comprehension problem.

FOFW.


He didn't ask me to do it. As it is non-reversible I want to make sure what it is exactly he wants doing before I do it.

But why not do it? Isn't it CC policy you're only supposed to have one account anyway?

Rincewind
27-03-2006, 10:01 PM
But why not do it? Isn't it CC policy you're only supposed to have one account anyway?

Please, I am Rincewind.

Alan Shore
27-03-2006, 10:05 PM
Please, I am Rincewind.

I'm sorry Baz, I'm afraid I can't do that...

Rhubarb
27-03-2006, 10:05 PM
FOFW.Did I forget to ģegister that, Dion?

Alan Shore
27-03-2006, 11:07 PM
Did I forget to ģegister that, Dion?

Haha. Please see its use a tribute to you Greg. :)

Rhubarb
27-03-2006, 11:54 PM
Haha. Please see its use a tribute to you Greg. :)
Better we attribute it to antichrist as he was the original inspiration. :)

Oepty
28-03-2006, 01:34 PM
His account is ScottColliver and for goodness sake just do it! ;)

Dion, I am not sure I want to be able to read a couple of PM's that made me quite angry before which I probably would get access to again if I got the accounts combined
Scott

Lucena
28-03-2006, 02:04 PM
Dion, I am not sure I want to be able to read a couple of PM's that made me quite angry before which I probably would get access to again if I got the accounts combined
Scott

You could always delete them.

Alan Shore
28-03-2006, 02:27 PM
Dion, I am not sure I want to be able to read a couple of PM's that made me quite angry before which I probably would get access to again if I got the accounts combined
Scott


You could always delete them.

Indeed.