Page 3 of 97 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 1450
  1. #31
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    12,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    The point is simple: even if employers are racist, they will be more likely to hire the best value for money.
    Best value for money - translation: less pay for equal work.
    So what's your excuse? To run like the devil's chasing you.

    See you in another life, brotha.

  2. #32
    CC International Master Goughfather's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    But you leftards know the reason: discrimination.
    And indeed Ian makes a reasonable case for that above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Yet throughout history and geography, this clearly can't be the reason in most cases.
    Why not? Do tell.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Therefore it should not be resorted to in the simplistic knee-jerk reaction by you and IM.
    In the absence of an explanation by yourself and in the presence of a plausible explanation by Ian, use of the term knee-jerk is simply without substance.

    Even if we accept that differences have always existed, this is different from saying that differences should be accepted and that they should not be rectified if possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Only "offensive" to those who avoid the facts to play your victimitis card. Yet when Sowell (b. 1930) and Williams (b. 1936) were growing up, there was no widespread criminality or illegitimacy, black parents insisted that their children study and work hard, and they certainly didn't speak "ebonics". Yet there was real systemic racism at the time. Sowell was thrown out of a segregated restaurant, and Williams faced discrimination in the army. Yet the blacks had their biggest improvements in wealth in the decades before civil rights laws.
    The problem is that when you simply speak from your talking points, you fail to produce a response of relevance. Nothing you write justifies your typecasting of black people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    GF, the real racist who holds blacks to different standards to whites,
    By all means feel free to substantiate this accusation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    And not surprisingly prefers policies that do real harm to blacks, despite their professed aim.
    Of course. It couldn't possibly be that I believe it is unconscionable for a person to pay a worker less for the same work, just because they happen to black.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    E.g. although these blacks might want to work for lower wages for a racist employer,
    Of course. I know I want to work for less than I'm worth - I've spent the last twelve months trying to convince my employer to cut my pay.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    OK, as long as this is applied properly, i.e. abolish affirmative action.
    If, as you suggest above, employers will not employ someone who is black unless they are able to exploit them, and if as Ian shows, equally qualified candidates for jobs who are black miss out on jobs to their white counterparts (albeit with a criminal conviction that the black person lacks), then there is a serious injustice to redress. This would simply address the affirmative action that employers have apparently exercised in favour of white people, even according to your argument.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    There is no systemic racism, and racism among whites is rare and despised.
    Of course, if this were really true, then the entire edifice of your argument in favour of abolishing minimum wage would crumble into the sea. At the same time, you argue that racism is virtually non-existent and then argue that because of rampant racism, we need to abolish the minimum wage. It is hard to tell in these circumstances whether your ineptitude or your myopia is greater. Whichever it is, you make every effort to turn yourself into a laughing stock.

    There is of course another contradiction in your argument that makes you look ridiculous. At the same time, you try to argue both that affirmative action is incredibly coercive in its ability to discriminate against the real victims - white people, and that anti-discrimination laws are so incredibly impotent that they cannot effectively deal with racist employers who refuse to hire black people because a minimum wage exists.
    Last edited by Goughfather; 18-04-2012 at 09:06 PM.
    "People with guns don't understand. That's why they get guns. Too many misunderstandings." - Jerry Seinfeld, The Little Kicks

  3. #33
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    12,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Thomas Sowell's column today, Mixing and Matching, addresses this subject:
    No, it doesn't really. He argues that it is natural for members of the same ethnic group to choose to to gravitate towards each other Re where they live. True he does mention that such a distribution may extend to employment. I doubt he would argue that it is natural for them to choose to gravitate towards the poor end of the income distribution for the same job though. I read that as people might gravitate to a certain industry, or certain sections of a given industry.

    No speck of evidence is considered necessary for this assumption to prevail at any level of government, including the Supreme Court of the United States.
    No doubt Sowell is drawing on the extensive experience he acquired during his summer of public service as an adolescent.
    So what's your excuse? To run like the devil's chasing you.

    See you in another life, brotha.

  4. #34
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,237
    Goughfather is doing a pretty good job prosecuting my case. However there are some issues which can't be allowed to go through to the keeper:

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Actually, blacks have had increasingly worse education, as Sowell has documented, because the teachers unions have gained more power
    Not so, whatever Sowell says. Black standards rose significantly until 20 years ago, when they plateaued then dipped nationally. However some black schools and indeed some states excelled.
    http://www.theadvocatesforhumanright...hivement_2.pdf

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    This is not systemic but individual, even if true (which is doubtful)
    When spread across 350 employers in a community, it is systemic. The study was conducted as the basis of a PhD dissertation by a sociologist, and is available in full from multiple sources, e.g. http://www.princeton.edu/~pager/pager_ajs.pdf What leads you to doubt its truth? Just a gut feeling?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Under affirmative action, a black applicant will often be chosen over a batter qualified white application
    You say so, so it must be true. Is that right? Or can you substantiate the claim?
    Last edited by Ian Murray; 18-04-2012 at 09:21 PM.

  5. #35
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray
    Goughfather is doing a pretty good job prosecuting my case.
    Evidently you need another ambulance-chaser.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray
    Not so, whatever Sowell says.
    He lived through it, and has documented it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray
    Black standards rose significantly until 20 years ago, when they plateaued then dipped nationally. However some black schools and indeed some states excelled.
    It's notable that they have failed in DC, although it is run by blacks. Blacks themselves loved the scholarship program that Obamov killed for the sake of his teachers union allies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray
    When spread across 350 employers in a community, it is systemic.
    No, even if true, it is still individual. Since anti-black discrimination is illegal, it is no systemic. Anti-white discrimination aka "affirmative action" is still legal though.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray
    The study was conducted as the basis of a PhD dissertation by a sociologist, and is available in full from multiple sources, e.g. http://www.princeton.edu/~pager/pager_ajs.pdf What leads you to doubt its truth? Just a gut feeling?
    Yes, sociology is a pseudoscience. It shows in your own comments based on such nonsense, which overlook key points, such as inequality of people groups in professions has been the norm not the exception, and that the same stats in many cases would prove discrmination against Whites in favour of Asians.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray
    You say so, so it must be true. Is that right? Or can you substantiate the claim?
    sowell has documented it across the world. In the USA, according to A History and Timeline of Affirmative Action:
    Reverse discrimination became an issue, epitomized by the famous Bakke case in 1978. Allan Bakke, a white male, had been rejected two years in a row by a medical school that had accepted less qualified minority applicants-the school had a separate admissions policy for minorities and reserved 16 out of 100 places for minority students. The Supreme Court outlawed inflexible quota systems in affirmative action programs, which in this case had unfairly discriminated against a white applicant. In the same ruling, however, the Court upheld the legality of affirmative action per se.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  6. #36
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    Even if we accept that differences have always existed, this is different from saying that differences should be accepted and that they should not be rectified if possible.
    But who does the rectifying? Just another bureaucracy interfering with free choices.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    The problem is that when you simply speak from your talking points, you fail to produce a response of relevance. Nothing you write justifies your typecasting of black people.
    Who typecasts? Not me, but the Left, which can't stand the fact that some blacks and women are conservatives.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    By all means feel free to substantiate this accusation.
    Easy: for one thing, you justified a black person voting for Obamov because he was black, but would shriek about white racism if a white man voted for McCain because he was white.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    Of course. It couldn't possibly be that I believe it is unconscionable for a person to pay a worker less for the same work, just because they happen to black.
    I believe its is unconscionable as well. But not everything unconscionable should be legislated against. Indeed, the free market is more likely to punish a racist (or sexist) for refusing to hire the best people because of race (or sex). Minimum wage laws have enabled racist employers, by removing this element of competition.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    Of course. I know I want to work for less than I'm worth - I've spent the last twelve months trying to convince my employer to cut my pay.
    Well, everyone thinks they are worth more. But the real minimum wage is zero, and it badly affects many black young people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    If, as you suggest above, employers will not employ someone who is black unless they are able to exploit them, and if as Ian shows, equally qualified candidates for jobs who are black miss out on jobs to their white counterparts (albeit with a criminal conviction that the black person lacks), then there is a serious injustice to redress. This would simply address the affirmative action that employers have apparently exercised in favour of white people, even according to your argument.
    No, affirmative action is when the government forces this discrimination. All this experiment shows, if true, is that some employers discriminate unfairly against blacks. The more free the market, the more they are likely to be punished for this idiocy.

    But while I am against all racism, a leftard racist like you excuses racism when committed by black people, or like IM, pretends that it's not racism at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    Of course, if this were really true, then the entire edifice of your argument in favour of abolishing minimum wage would crumble into the sea. At the same time, you argue that racism is virtually non-existent and then argue that because of rampant racism, we need to abolish the minimum wage. It is hard to tell in these circumstances whether your ineptitude or your myopia is greater. Whichever it is, you make every effort to turn yourself into a laughing stock.
    You show that leftism turns people into morons. I, like Friedman, Williams, and Sowell, argue against the minimum wage for economic reasons: while a government can raise the minimum wage, it can't make people's productivity match this arbitrary point. Thus unless the employer is really a charity, he won't hire people who are less productive than that wage. So young workers are denied the chance to learn important basic skills for the work place that would make them more productive: working with people, following instructions, handling money, and general shedding of immaturity. So young people are affected, and as Friedman says, a lot of black people who have had the misfortune of being mis-educated in the government schools. I've already documented how white racist trade unions loved the minimum wage to keep out black workers.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goughfather
    There is of course another contradiction in your argument that makes you look ridiculous. At the same time, you try to argue both that affirmative action is incredibly coercive in its ability to discriminate against the real victims - white people, and that anti-discrimination laws are so incredibly impotent that they cannot effectively deal with racist employers who refuse to hire black people because a minimum wage exists.
    Simple: because affirmative action exists mainly in government-funded institutions. And it really does victimize the poorest whites, and benetits mainly the blacks who are already best off. This pattern is found all over the world, in all manner of racial groups, as Sowell has documented.

    And as Williams has also shown, the market is the best way to punish racist employers.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  7. #37
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,661
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner
    Best value for money - translation: less pay for equal work.
    But in the free market, employers who underpay are in competition with other employers who offer better pay and conditions. Indeed, the very accusation of "greed" will do much to force employers to hire the best people regardless of race. That was obvious long ago when sports team managers had to hire black people, even if the managers were racist. In that Friedman clip, he pointed out that minorities have succeeded best in the competitive marketplace.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  8. #38
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    12,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    But in the free market, employers who underpay are in competition with other employers who offer better pay and conditions. Indeed, the very accusation of "greed" will do much to force employers to hire the best people regardless of race. That was obvious long ago when sports team managers had to hire black people, even if the managers were racist. In that Friedman clip, he pointed out that minorities have succeeded best in the competitive marketplace.
    According to Friedman, those black school leavers are not worth minimum wage but a comparable white worker is. What other conclusion is there to be drawn? Why should said black have to lower his asking rate in order to compete with his white peer?
    So what's your excuse? To run like the devil's chasing you.

    See you in another life, brotha.

  9. #39
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,237
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Blacks themselves loved the scholarship program that Obamov killed for the sake of his teachers union allies.
    Obama is a proponent of charter schools and merit pay, neither of which are embraced by the teachers unions. In fact his report card on education stands up pretty well in straitened financial times - http://www.education.com/magazine/article/Barack_Obama/

    No, even if true, it is still individual. Since anti-black discrimination is illegal, it is no systemic. Anti-white discrimination aka "affirmative action" is still legal though.
    Legality is not a prerequisite for a system-wide application. A community is a system.

    Yes, sociology is a pseudoscience. It shows in your own comments based on such nonsense, which overlook key points, such as inequality of people groups in professions has been the norm not the exception, and that the same stats in many cases would prove discrmination against Whites in favour of Asians.
    None of which discredits the fieldwork by job applicants

    sowell has documented it across the world. In the USA, according to A History and Timeline of Affirmative Action:
    Reverse discrimination became an issue, epitomized by the famous Bakke case in 1978. Allan Bakke, a white male, had been rejected two years in a row by a medical school that had accepted less qualified minority applicants-the school had a separate admissions policy for minorities and reserved 16 out of 100 places for minority students. The Supreme Court outlawed inflexible quota systems in affirmative action programs, which in this case had unfairly discriminated against a white applicant. In the same ruling, however, the Court upheld the legality of affirmative action per se.
    Bakke was actually rejected by 14 medical schools - his case is not as simple as Sowell would have us believe - http://voices.yahoo.com/is-reverse-d...580.html?cat=9

  10. #40
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,661
    NEGROES WITH GUNS
    Ann Coulter shares history of Dems keeping firearms out of the hand of blacks

    A World War II Marine veteran, [great civil rights hero Robert F.] Williams returned home to Monroe, N.C., to find the Klan riding high – beating, lynching and murdering blacks at will. No one would join the NAACP for fear of Klan reprisals. Williams became president of the local chapter and increased membership from six to more than 200.

    But it was not until he got a charter from the NRA in 1957 and founded the Black Armed Guard that the Klan got their comeuppance in Monroe.

    Williams’ repeated thwarting of violent Klan attacks is described in his stirring book, “Negroes With Guns.” In one crucial battle, the Klan sieged the home of a black physician and his wife, but Williams and his Black Armed Guard stood sentry and repelled the larger, cowardly force. And that was the end of it.

    As the Klan found out, it’s not so much fun when the rabbit’s got the gun.

    The NRA’s proud history of fighting the Klan has been airbrushed out of the record by those who were complicit with the KKK, Jim Crow and racial terror, to wit: the Democrats.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  11. #41
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,661
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner
    According to Friedman, those black school leavers are not worth minimum wage but a comparable white worker is.
    Minimum wage laws hurt both races, but as Friedman says, black teens are more likely to have been failed by rotten government schools. Also, welfare has broken the black family. Friedman himself had a black secretary for many years, but I learned that from Sowell because Friedman made nothing of it.

    Note: the same policies in the UK have produced sorry results in many Anglo-Saxons. The same has happened in Sweden, the Left's favorite socialist paradise now that the Soviet Union fell apart. See Walter Williams explain.


    Quote Originally Posted by road runner
    What other conclusion is there to be drawn? Why should said black have to lower his asking rate in order to compete with his white peer?
    Why should the young blacks be prevented from working at all unless their productivity is as high as the minimum wage? Answer (historically): because white racist Democratic trade unions wanted to keep blacks out.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  12. #42
    CC International Master Goughfather's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    But who does the rectifying? Just another bureaucracy interfering with free choices.
    The free choice to be racist and discriminate against black people? You might think that such discrimination is fine, but those who aren't racist would think that this is a free choice worth interfering with.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Who typecasts? Not me, but the Left, which can't stand the fact that some blacks and women are conservatives.
    You continually typecast black people are being more criminal and more lowly-skilled.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Easy: for one thing, you justified a black person voting for Obamov because he was black, but would shriek about white racism if a white man voted for McCain because he was white.
    Oh, that's what you're whinging about. As I've pointed out, considering that white privilege is the default position in America, the idea of electing a white person because he was white for the purpose of addressing white disadvantage in America is decidedly nutty. That's why it can't be equated to a black person voting for a black person in the hope (justified or not) that this would do something to address black disadvantage.

    Of course it might further be added that most people voting for Obama because he was black were not voting against McCain because he was white. The converse is likely to be true for white people voting for white candidates because they are white.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    I believe its is unconscionable as well. But not everything unconscionable should be legislated against. Indeed, the free market is more likely to punish a racist (or sexist) for refusing to hire the best people because of race (or sex). Minimum wage laws have enabled racist employers, by removing this element of competition.
    Something unconscionable that unjustly discriminates against people of a certain race should be legislated against.

    Your suggestion about racist business owners being punished in a free market is simply ridiculous. It seems like in the type of free market you advocate, the racism of racist business owners is either rewarded, or at least tolerated by requiring black people to operate according to sweatshop wages and conditions merely because they are black.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Well, everyone thinks they are worth more. But the real minimum wage is zero, and it badly affects many black young people.
    I would agree that your proposals that black people should work for sweatshop wages simply because they are black is something that does badly affect many young black people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    No, affirmative action is when the government forces this discrimination. All this experiment shows, if true, is that some employers discriminate unfairly against blacks. The more free the market, the more they are likely to be punished for this idiocy.
    Or rather rewarded, as explained above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    But while I am against all racism, a leftard racist like you excuses racism when committed by black people, or like IM, pretends that it's not racism at all.
    Already addressed above. You don't understand the concept of racism and this why you wrongly believe that you are not racist.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    You show that leftism turns people into morons. I, like Friedman, Williams, and Sowell, argue against the minimum wage for economic reasons: while a government can raise the minimum wage, it can't make people's productivity match this arbitrary point. Thus unless the employer is really a charity, he won't hire people who are less productive than that wage. So young workers are denied the chance to learn important basic skills for the work place that would make them more productive: working with people, following instructions, handling money, and general shedding of immaturity. So young people are affected, and as Friedman says, a lot of black people who have had the misfortune of being mis-educated in the government schools. I've already documented how white racist trade unions loved the minimum wage to keep out black workers.
    There is a reason that these jobs are called "unskilled" or "entry-level" labour. As such, your protestations about the existence of a minimum wage are without foundation.

    Of course, in talking about black teenagers, you forget that one of the main reasons for a "livable wage" exists is to ensure that those who support family members are in a position to do so. The question of minimum wage affects many more people than your 15 year old entering the job market for the first time.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Simple: because affirmative action exists mainly in government-funded institutions. And it really does victimize the poorest whites, and benetits mainly the blacks who are already best off. This pattern is found all over the world, in all manner of racial groups, as Sowell has documented.

    And as Williams has also shown, the market is the best way to punish racist employers.
    And as I shown above, your idea of the market only rewards racist employers, or at the very least approves of their conduct.
    "People with guns don't understand. That's why they get guns. Too many misunderstandings." - Jerry Seinfeld, The Little Kicks

  13. #43
    CC Grandmaster Desmond's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    The island
    Posts
    12,628
    Quote Originally Posted by Jono
    Minimum wage laws hurt both races, but as Friedman says, black teens are more likely to have been failed by rotten government schools.
    So according to you, the solution is to allow black kids to reduce their asking pay rate to below the minimum wage.

    Why should the young blacks be prevented from working at all unless their productivity is as high as the minimum wage? Answer (historically): because white racist Democratic trade unions wanted to keep blacks out.
    Before you were arguing that it wasn't a matter of being less productive, but rather of being equally productive yet passed over in favour of candidates of a different race.
    Last edited by Desmond; 20-04-2012 at 06:44 AM.
    So what's your excuse? To run like the devil's chasing you.

    See you in another life, brotha.

  14. #44
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,237
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner
    So according to you, the solution is to allow black kids to reduce their asking pay rate to below the minimum wage.
    Asking for pay only invites discrimination - ideally they should work without pay, and be thankful for being employed.

  15. #45
    CC International Master Goughfather's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,380
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray
    Asking for pay only invites discrimination - ideally they should work without pay, and be thankful for being employed.
    Indeed. After all, they're learning valuable skills.

    Jono became apoplectic about my suggestion that his arguments about abolishing the minimum wage were effectively arguments in favour of slavery, calling slavery the "dismal science". Of course, he had much more trouble successfully arguing about why slavery was not the unpalatable, though logical conclusion of his arguments.

    He is yet to explain why anti-discrimination laws would be ineffective in addressing the racist business owners he mentions, while at the same time arguing that racism is virtually non-existent. All very surprising when you consider that according to Jono, workplace laws are meant to be devastatingly effective at keeping the white man down.
    Last edited by Goughfather; 19-04-2012 at 09:57 PM.
    "People with guns don't understand. That's why they get guns. Too many misunderstandings." - Jerry Seinfeld, The Little Kicks

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2450
    Last Post: 09-11-2019, 11:44 PM
  2. An elegant triple rep definition
    By Jesper Norgaard in forum Arbiters' Corner
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 21-06-2010, 10:11 AM
  3. Melbourne Chess Club Calendar 2007
    By Bereaved in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 13-01-2007, 05:08 PM
  4. Melbourne Chess Club Calendar for 2006
    By Bereaved in forum Completed Tournaments
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 30-07-2006, 10:08 PM
  5. Minimum time control for standard rating
    By Rincewind in forum Australian Chess
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: 24-04-2004, 10:22 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •