PDA

View Full Version : Religious sponsorship (sf. Gold Coast Open/Minor)



Desmond
25-06-2006, 07:52 PM
I see Boris is online, will he be kind enough to give us some final results, including his experiences at the tournament :)

My experiences at the tournament? Gladly.

For those who don't know (including me until I arrived yesterday morning), the tournament was run with a church as the major sponsor. While I would have no objections to this in itself, I do object to a priest (or equivalent) giving a blessing/prayer as an anouncement before the start of the first round. I found that to be highly inappropriate, and if I had children playing in it, they would have been removed.

Rincewind
25-06-2006, 08:03 PM
For those who don't know (including me until I arrived yesterday morning), the tournament was run with a church as the major sponsor. While I would have no objections to this in itself, I do object to a priest (or equivalent) giving a blessing/prayer as an anouncement before the start of the first round. I found that to be highly inappropriate, and if I had children playing in it, they would have been removed.

But think of the health benefits.

Garvinator
25-06-2006, 08:04 PM
But think of the health benefits.
health benefits :uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh: ??

Basil
25-06-2006, 08:04 PM
But think of the health benefits.

Damn.
Paying $20 HCDs, right there, folks.

Garvinator
25-06-2006, 08:05 PM
My experiences at the tournament? Gladly.

For those who don't know (including me until I arrived yesterday morning), the tournament was run with a church as the major sponsor. While I would have no objections to this in itself, I do object to a priest (or equivalent) giving a blessing/prayer as an anouncement before the start of the first round. I found that to be highly inappropriate, and if I had children playing in it, they would have been removed.
is that it? Interesting, I wonder what ac would have made of all this considering his absolute love of pre round announcements:whistle:

Rincewind
25-06-2006, 08:06 PM
health benefits :uhoh: :uhoh: :uhoh: ??

http://chesschat.org/showthread.php?p=108264#post108264

:doh:

Garvinator
25-06-2006, 08:08 PM
:doh:
the :doh: is very harsh since I stopped reading that thread after just a few posts.

antichrist
25-06-2006, 08:19 PM
My experiences at the tournament? Gladly.

For those who don't know (including me until I arrived yesterday morning), the tournament was run with a church as the major sponsor. While I would have no objections to this in itself, I do object to a priest (or equivalent) giving a blessing/prayer as an anouncement before the start of the first round. I found that to be highly inappropriate, and if I had children playing in it, they would have been removed.

Besides being very busy that also put me off attending.

antichrist
25-06-2006, 08:21 PM
is that it? Interesting, I wonder what ac would have made of all this considering his absolute love of pre round announcements:whistle:

You have got me mixed up with KB! ..and Brian Jones who denies making them but was then caught out.

But don't let KB hear even a whisper about them - he will never give you peace.

Rincewind
25-06-2006, 08:22 PM
the :doh: is very harsh since I stopped reading that thread after just a few posts.

I'm a cruel man, but fair.

Garrett
25-06-2006, 08:36 PM
Yes I thought the idea of a church minister leading a prayer prior to round one a little odd. It was a church that organised it and I think they do community work as well. Christians are mostly harmless these days.

antichrist
25-06-2006, 08:39 PM
Yes I thought the idea of a church minister leading a prayer prior to round one a little odd. It was a church that organised it and I think they do community work as well. Christians are mostly harmless these days.

Not to gays they are not!

Nor to women needing birth control choices.

Nor to trying to exploit the naive into tithing

Garrett
25-06-2006, 08:52 PM
Not to gays they are not!

Nor to women needing birth control choices.

Nor to trying to exploit the naive into tithing

Um, I don't want to start a religious debate but (a) I don't think the incidence of homophobia amoung christians would be no higher than the general population. (b) A woman has access to birth control at a chemist (c) There are heaps of non-christian con people all to willing to part the gullible with their cash.

Desmond
25-06-2006, 08:55 PM
Yes I thought the idea of a church minister leading a prayer prior to round one a little odd. It was a church that organised it and I think they do community work as well. Christians are mostly harmless these days.

I have no problem with sponsors making announcements. If he had advertised that the church meets wherever and whenever ... no problems. Giving a prayer is going to far though IMO.

Rincewind
25-06-2006, 09:01 PM
Um, I don't want to start a religious debate but (a) I don't think the incidence of homophobia amoung christians would be no higher than the general population. (b) A woman has access to birth control at a chemist (c) There are heaps of non-christian con people all to willing to part the gullible with their cash.

(a) Some christian religions teach that homosexuality is a sin and homosexuals are denied salvation on that basis.

(b) Some christian religions (including the most populous one) teaches that contraception sold in pharmacies is wrong.

(c) The gullibility of non-christians is not the issue.

No idea about this church which sponsored the Gold Coast thing though. It would be interesting what the reaction would be if a tabacco company sponsored it and handed out free product to participating juniors (for them to bring to their parents, of course).

antichrist
25-06-2006, 09:02 PM
Um, I don't want to start a religious debate but (a) I don't think the incidence of homophobia amoung christians would be no higher than the general population.

A/C
But the churches (in general) want to keep them suppressed in various ways. They don't speak out when governments refuses gay rights. They are against gay clergy etc.


(b) A woman has access to birth control at a chemist

Not if the religions had their way there would not be. I know that they have warned parishioners off doctors who handle references to abortions.

(c) There are heaps of non-christian con people all to willing to part the gullible with their cash.

But the church puts themselves up as a basis of morality and it is prescribed in their stupid book.

Basil
25-06-2006, 09:07 PM
Giving a prayer is going to far though IMO.

Boris, do you prefer to play your tournaments without a prayer? :)

Cat
25-06-2006, 09:33 PM
Peter Bender's Outreach Church sponsored the GOld Coast Open. They requested permission to say a prayer prior to proceedings. One of our seniors on the committee raised an objection to this and so a committee convened to discuss the relative merits.

Both sides put their case but in the event it was agreed that the Church be treated like any other sponsor. As such it was felt a prayer was no different to any other company pitch, which is commonplace in sponsored sporting events. Peter was very sensitive to the concerns raised and in my experience always conducts himself professionally.

Personally I've witnessed many company pitches which have been quite ugly. For me, the right to say a prayer was pretty tame if not even touching.

bergil
25-06-2006, 09:36 PM
Peter Bender's Outreach Church sponsored the GOld Coast Open. They requested permission to say a prayer prior to proceedings. One of our seniors on the committee raised an objection to this and so a committee convened to discuss the relative merits.

Both sides put their case but in the event it was agreed that the Church be treated like any other sponsor. As such it was felt a prayer was no different to any other company pitch, which is commonplace in sponsored sporting events. Peter was very sensitive to the concerns raised and in my experience always conducts himself professionally.

Personally I've witnessed many company pitches which have been quite ugly. For me, the right to say a prayer was pretty tame if not even touching.
Sounds fair enough

Desmond
25-06-2006, 09:42 PM
Boris, do you prefer to play your tournaments without a prayer? :)
Yes, and that may be my first mistake ;)

Desmond
25-06-2006, 09:45 PM
Peter Bender's Outreach Church etc
Hi Cat, do you think your reaction would be the same if it were another religion your children were being preached to about? Say, Scientology or Islam for instance.

Alan Shore
25-06-2006, 09:54 PM
Hi Cat, do you think your reaction would be the same if it were another religion your children were being preached to about? Say, Scientology or Islam for instance.

I think you should be more tolerant yourself. An organisation is sponsoring the place so they're entitled to their say. You can make your own decision as to the veracity of whatever they're announcing.

firegoat7
25-06-2006, 09:56 PM
Personally I've witnessed many company pitches which have been quite ugly.
They all prey on you in some manner.

cheers Fg7

Desmond
25-06-2006, 09:56 PM
I think you should be more tolerant yourself. An organisation is sponsoring the place so they're entitled to their say. You can make your own decision as to the veracity of whatever they're announcing.
Am I supposed to read between the lines to get the answer to my question that you quoted? Or did you just ignore it?

Alan Shore
25-06-2006, 09:59 PM
Am I supposed to read between the lines to get the answer to my question that you quoted? Or did you just ignore it?

I thought the irony was self-evident. My comment stands applicable to the examples you gave. People (children too) require exposure to alternate views and ideals, not just what you the parent dictates to them.

bergil
25-06-2006, 10:01 PM
Hi Cat, do you think your reaction would be the same if it were another religion your children were being preached to about? Say, Scientology or Islam for instance.
But it wasn't and as Australia is a predominately Christian society, what is your point?

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 10:02 PM
Um, I don't want to start a religious debate but (a) I don't think the incidence of homophobia amoung christians would be no higher than the general population.

I would be surprised if it was not at least slightly higher. Studies have shown strong corellations between conservative or fundamentalist Christian views and homophobia - I can cite some references on this if needed. Whether there would be a weaker corellation between other Christian views and homophobia, or whether other Christians would be no more likely to be homophobic than non-Christians, I don't know.

Whether any homophobe can truly call themselves a Christian is of course another matter. :D

On the church sponsorship thing, I really don't want to let my atheist biases make me understate my gratitude at any funding chess can get from anywhere. However I still agree with Boris. If an event is going to be sponsored by a body that is potentially controversial this should be stated clearly on the entry form so entrants can make informed decisions. Or alternatively if a controversial sponsor is recruited at the last moment then it may be best not to permit them to say anything that might be considered dodgy. [EDIT: I do now think this was covered OK in the form, see post 87]

antichrist
25-06-2006, 10:03 PM
I hope the preacher did not implore players to ask for God's help?

Garvinator
25-06-2006, 10:05 PM
I hope the preacher did not implore players to ask for God's help?
why not, most players usually pray for divine guidance to save their sorry asses during their games :P

bergil
25-06-2006, 10:05 PM
I hope the preacher did not implore players to ask for God's help?
Only against Satan :P

Desmond
25-06-2006, 10:08 PM
I thought the irony was self-evident. My comment stands applicable to the examples you gave. People (children too) require exposure to alternate views and ideals, not just what you the parent dictates to them.
Forgive me for asking, but are you serious? There were children present that I estimate to be no more than 6 or 7. If a parent wants them to be exposed to religious views - fine. But the parents had no choice sice there was no warning.

I know plenty of christians who would be horrified to learn that they had just dropped little Jonny off at the chess tournament for the morning to later learn that there was a Scientology sermon before the first round.

Desmond
25-06-2006, 10:09 PM
why not, most players usually pray for divine guidance to save their sorry asses during their games :P
Yes, but let's hope at least not until move 6 or so.

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 10:15 PM
I think you should be more tolerant yourself.

I think the word "tolerant" should only ever be used in the strong sense of the word in which to "tolerate" is to allow to exist without forceful interference (irrespective of one's views on the thing being tolerated.)

Use of "tolerant" in the context you're using it (the modern hippy version) smears someone who is merely disagreeing with something with the taint suggested by the stronger sense of the word (and hence implies they must be some kind of rigid bigot). I stop just short of believing watered down meanings of "tolerance" should be punishable by imprisonment on bread and water, but only because I'm such a tolerant guy. :P


An organisation is sponsoring the place so they're entitled to their say. You can make your own decision as to the veracity of whatever they're announcing.

Boris hasn't gone far enough in his analogy for my liking. How about if a tournament was sponsored by Satanists? :eek:

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 10:17 PM
why not, most players usually pray for divine guidance to save their sorry asses during their games :P

I noticed a young opponent clasping his hands in an expression of apparent prayer during a particularly tight game. He had black in this game: shortly after his apparent prayer the position changed from -/+ to +-. :owned:

bergil
25-06-2006, 10:18 PM
Boris hasn't gone far enough in his analogy for my liking. How about if a tournament was sponsored by Satanists? :eek:
Is an orgy involved? :uhoh:

Alan Shore
25-06-2006, 10:18 PM
Forgive me for asking, but are you serious? There were children present that I estimate to be no more than 6 or 7. If a parent wants them to be exposed to religious views - fine. But the parents had no choice sice there was no warning.

Exposed? Oh no... it's as bad as that naughty bad language and gratuitous sexual imagery! :rolleyes:


I know plenty of christians who would be horrified to learn that they had just dropped little Jonny off at the chess tournament for the morning to later learn that there was a Scientology sermon before the first round.

Sermon? Haha, nice exaggeration. Look, if parents become too obsessed about 'protecting' their children from such mundane things as religion they're going to run into far worse trouble later on. Children who are 'protected' from some things their parents think are abominable can either turn out completely ignorant or they'll rebel and embrace things they're 'not supposed to get involved in'.

It's mystifying how this hysteria about protection has gripped parents these days.... they have no idea what their children see on public internet forums though.

I say all this in a general sense of course - in certain specific cases, naturally, discretion should apply but in the case of a 'blessing' at a chess tournament your over-reaction borders on the comical. :)

four four two
25-06-2006, 10:18 PM
Boris hasn't gone far enough in his analogy for my liking. How about if a tournament was sponsored by Satanists? :eek:

I'm just waiting for a tournament to be sponsored by Goths...where you get a Bauhaus record for a rating prize.:D ;)

antichrist
25-06-2006, 10:19 PM
Or by some porno mob who want to put on a live display?

We will all be in on that.

Cat
25-06-2006, 10:19 PM
Hi Cat, do you think your reaction would be the same if it were another religion your children were being preached to about? Say, Scientology or Islam for instance.

Peter was known to the Chess Committee and indeed has been involved in chess events for some time on the Coast. His character was such that he had our confidence. Obviously these things would all have to be considered on their merit. A prayer before play would probably have been acceptable no matter what the religious persuation. The important thing was a good working relationship between the sponsor and the club with well defined boundaries.

Cat
25-06-2006, 10:20 PM
Or by some porno mob who want to put on a live display?

We will all be in on that.

The porno mob will be sponsoring the Nell Van Der Graff Classic in September.

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2006, 10:22 PM
why not, most players usually pray for divine guidance to save their sorry asses during their games :PSurely that would be against Article 12.2 a.
During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information, advice, or analyse on another chessboard. ;)

Garvinator
25-06-2006, 10:24 PM
Surely that would be against Article 12.2 a.
During play the players are forbidden to make use of any notes, sources of information, advice, or analyse on another chessboard. ;)
and imagine the penalties when I am arbiter :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :owned: :whistle: :uhoh: ahh but is it sources of information or advice? ;)

four four two
25-06-2006, 10:25 PM
The porno mob will be sponsoring the Nell Van Der Graff Classic in September.

Pardon the pun,but come again?:hmm:

bergil
25-06-2006, 10:25 PM
and imagine the penalties when I am arbiter :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :P :owned: :whistle: :uhoh:
Forfeit the tourney! :hmm:

Garvinator
25-06-2006, 10:25 PM
Pardon the pun,but come again?:hmm:
surely this is worth a few hcd's?

bergil
25-06-2006, 10:26 PM
Pardon the pun,but come again?:hmm:
And often! :D

firegoat7
25-06-2006, 10:26 PM
Or by some porno mob who want to put on a live display?



Jesus Christ pornostar! the musical!!

antichrist
25-06-2006, 10:26 PM
what about if the arbitar is an atheist and has caught the theist player praying for help - would he have to be a hypocrite and book him?

Cat
25-06-2006, 10:26 PM
Pardon the pun,but come again?:hmm:

Its a work in progress at the moment, I hope it won't be an anti-climax

Desmond
25-06-2006, 10:28 PM
Exposed? Oh no... it's as bad as that naughty bad language and gratuitous sexual imagery! :rolleyes:
Yes, and it's worse. And we do have safeguards against such things; movie classifications for instance.


Sermon? Haha, nice exaggeration. Look, if parents become too obsessed about 'protecting' their children from such mundane things as religion they're going to run into far worse trouble later on. If they want it to be later on, let them have the choice by letting them know in advance.


Children who are 'protected' from some things their parents think are abominable can either turn out completely ignorant or they'll rebel and embrace things they're 'not supposed to get involved in'.
Thanks captain obvious. I don't think they'll be turned into crack addicts just yet.


It's mystifying how this hysteria about protection has gripped parents these days.... they have no idea what their children see on public internet forums though.
Maybe you would like to write the book on parenting. You seem to know it all.


I say all this in a general sense of course - in certain specific cases, naturally, discretion should apply but in the case of a 'blessing' at a chess tournament your over-reaction borders on the comical. :)
Ah, so you finally admit that it depends on which religion is involved. So now you also have to admit that it is subjective. What christians think is ok may be different from others.
A.N. Other.

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 10:29 PM
People (children too) require exposure to alternate views and ideals, not just what you the parent dictates to them.

The rightful place for this is a comparative religion class in school, not a chess tournament. :rolleyes:



Personally I've witnessed many company pitches which have been quite ugly.

Sure. However, there are special issues when it comes to religion because the messages of doctrinal religions are often deeply offensive to some non-believers in ways that no amount of tactful presentation can smooth over.

firegoat7
25-06-2006, 10:33 PM
The rightful place for this is a comparative religion class in school, not a chess tournament. :rolleyes:



keep your lid on it. If their payin start prayin- nobody is forcing you to enter the tournament.

cheers Fg7

antichrist
25-06-2006, 10:34 PM
keep your lid on it. If their payin start prayin- nobody is forcing you to enter the tournament.

cheers Fg7

what about if they were preaching capitalism?

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 10:38 PM
keep your lid on it. If their payin start prayin- nobody is forcing you to enter the tournament.

You should pray for a better attention span. In this case the player did not find out until he rocked up at the tournament - he had already entered, unaware of the sponsorship. [edit: but see post 87]

firegoat7
25-06-2006, 10:40 PM
what about if they were preaching capitalism?

they do anyway normally so....

cheers Fg7

firegoat7
25-06-2006, 10:41 PM
You should pray for a better attention span. In this case the player did not find out until he rocked up at the tournament - he had already entered, unaware of the sponsorship.

Who cares....I think the player is being a little bit precious...boohooo

cheers fg7

antichrist
25-06-2006, 10:43 PM
Who cares....I think the player is being a little bit precious...boohooo

cheers fg7

God almighty - it would be enough to put an atheist off their game, he should sue for damages.

Cat
25-06-2006, 10:45 PM
Sure. However, there are special issues when it comes to religion because the messages of doctrinal religions are often deeply offensive to some non-believers in ways that no amount of tactful presentation can smooth over.

Well there were 6 of us present during the discussion. There were all shades of opinion and I was probably the most reserved apart from the individual that raised the concern. A wide range of issues were canvassed and in the end the decision was virtually unanimous. There were an atheist & agnostic present, 2 devotional christians and another 2 who had private spiritual beliefs.

The concern that was raised is the one you have mentioned. In particular we have a large Asian community playing chess here. It's not the first time Outreach Chess have done this kind of thing and generally the feedback we have recieved has been fairly relaxed.

In a society if there is no avenue for freedom of expression then bad things can happen. We took the view this was a commerical bid like any other, and the same scrutiny should apply. What was important to us was that our sponsors would live up to our expectations and in return they should rightly expect some recognition. I think anything else would have prejudiced local chess interests.

Desmond
25-06-2006, 10:46 PM
Who cares....I think the player is being a little bit precious...boohooo

cheers fg7
Some people take religion seriously.

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 10:47 PM
Who cares....I think the player is being a little bit precious...boohooo

cheers fg7

OK, so suppose I contact MCC and offer to throw in $5 for exclusive naming rights for your next weekender. The committee, figuring that based on the turnout of six to their last event that's the best they're going to get, accepts my offer. The tournament gets named the Beaumont Should Have Got A Lifetime Ban Open and before play all players get to listen to a taped 30-minute recording of me lecturing on the virtues of thread-splitting. I'm sure that you would not complain at all, not a whimper, no siree!

Desmond
25-06-2006, 10:49 PM
In a society if there is no avenue for freedom of expression then bad things can happen. We took the view this was a commerical bid like any other, and the same scrutiny should apply. What was important to us was that our sponsors would live up to our expectations and in return they should rightly expect some recognition. I think anything else would have prejudiced local chess interests.
As previously mentioned, in my opinion the recognition of your sponsor should have stopped short of a prayer.

antichrist
25-06-2006, 10:49 PM
I think FG planet is wobbling on it's axis

Cat
25-06-2006, 10:51 PM
You should pray for a better attention span. In this case the player did not find out until he rocked up at the tournament - he had already entered, unaware of the sponsorship.

Oh yeah and like everybody is just so aware of sponsorship prior to events. Last year I refused to enter a tournement in Brisbane because they were sponsored by Nke. B'stards I thought, using Indonesian sweat-shop kids to pay for a 1st world chess tournament. Now that really sucks! The world's a terrible place, there's lot's of really bad thing's going down. Outreach Church is not one of them.

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 10:54 PM
In a society if there is no avenue for freedom of expression then bad things can happen.

I have news for you: freedom of expression in society will not suddenly collapse to nothing if someone is denied the opportunity to buy the right to address a chess tournament on a matter irrelevant to chess.


We took the view this was a commerical bid like any other, and the same scrutiny should apply.

Oh, I agree, but the scrutiny of bids should include the careful handling of bids from contentious kinds of sponsors. (I'm not saying they shouldn't have been accepted as a sponsor. )

Cat
25-06-2006, 10:55 PM
As previously mentioned, in my opinion the recognition of your sponsor should have stopped short of a prayer.

In the normal course of events the sponsor would articulate his wishes and how he would make his pitch. Peter's wishes were expressed and none of us found his plans to be problematic. It's not like we've got sponsors falling out of the trees, nor did we approach a tobacco company. Personally I am very grateful to Peter and the efforts of Outreach Church.

antichrist
25-06-2006, 10:56 PM
Oh yeah and like everybody is just so aware of sponsorship prior to events. Last year I refused to enter a tournement in Brisbane because they were sponsored by Nke. B'stards I thought, using Indonesian sweat-shop kids to pay for a 1st world chess tournament. Now that really sucks! The world's a terrible place, there's lot's of really bad thing's going down. Outreach Church is not one of them.

The harm they do is invisible - but still there, not smelly like your shoes.

Basil
25-06-2006, 11:01 PM
surely this is worth a few hcd's?
Just give me my 5% and why not?

Desmond
25-06-2006, 11:02 PM
In the normal course of events the sponsor would articulate his wishes and how he would make his pitch. Peter's wishes were expressed and none of us found his plans to be problematic. It's not like we've got sponsors falling out of the trees, nor did we approach a tobacco company. Personally I am very grateful to Peter and the efforts of Outreach Church.
Are you saying that you would have lost the deal with the sponsor if they had been instructed to give a short speech and omit the prayer?

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:03 PM
Oh, I agree, but the scrutiny of bids should include the careful handling of bids from contentious kinds of sponsors. (I'm not saying they shouldn't have been accepted as a sponsor. I am saying that there seems to be a problem when someone enters without knowing they are a sponsor.)

Outreach Church were never a contentious sponsor, we were pleased with their sponsorship and are very grateful for their contribution. Your sentence in bracket doesn't make grammatical sense.

KB, I'm very aware of your personal prejudices and I would be grateful if they could be contained. It's the stakeholders that matter here, viz. Outreach Chess, The Gold Coast Chess Club and the players. I think everyone has really benefited from the arrangement and I hope Outreach Church continue their association. Any sponsorship is most welcome.

BTW I would honestly say the Gold Coast Chess community benefits far more from the activities of Outreach Church than they do from the ACF right now!

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 11:04 PM
Oh yeah and like everybody is just so aware of sponsorship prior to events.

Well, typically they are, because sponsorship tends to be organised quite a while in advance and is often on the entry form for maximum exposure. So when was the sponsorship determined and announced and why would the player not have been aware of it?


Last year I refused to enter a tournement in Brisbane because they were sponsored by Nke. B'stards I thought, using Indonesian sweat-shop kids to pay for a 1st world chess tournament. Now that really sucks!

I've never heard of Nike sponsoring an Aus tournament so I assume this is a hypothetical. Contentious sponsorship is one thing and from time to time some player won't play in an event over it. That's their prerogative. The issue here appears to be a contentious sponsorship a player didn't know about.


The world's a terrible place, there's lot's of really bad thing's going down. Outreach Church is not one of them.

I find it impossible to judge the net worth of a church. I do feel however that those churches that are focussed on inclusivity, community service and a fully non-threatening message would do mankind a far greater service if they dropped the irrevocably tainted label "Christian" and called themselves something else.

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:07 PM
Are you saying that you would have lost the deal with the sponsor if they had been instructed to give a short speech and omit the prayer?

Possibly but the issue wasn't pushed because generally there was little opposition. At the end of the day we would wish to promote our relationship positively with our sponsor. The strength of having a committed local sponsor cannot be over-emphasised.

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2006, 11:09 PM
Outreach Church were never a contentious sponsor, we were pleased with their sponsorship and are very grateful for their contribution. Your sentence in bracket doesn't make grammatical sense.

KB, I'm very aware of your personal prejudices and I would be grateful if they could be contained. It's the stakeholders that matter here, viz. Outreach Chess, The Gold Coast Chess Club and the players. I think everyone has really benefited from the arrangement and I hope Outreach Church continue their association. Any sponsorship is most welcome.

BTW I would honestly say the Gold Coast Chess community benefits far more from the activities of Outreach Church than they do from the ACF right now!I notice on the entry form for the event that cheques were payable to Outreach Chess and not the Gold Coast Chess Club or Gardiner Chess.
As such they are far more than a sponsor, they are the organiser.

Desmond
25-06-2006, 11:10 PM
I've never heard of Nike sponsoring an Aus tournament so I assume this is a hypothetical. Contentious sponsorship is one thing and from time to time some player won't play in an event over it. That's their prerogative. The issue here appears to be a contentious sponsorship a player didn't know about.

The main reason I played was to support chess and the organisers. I would not have played if I knew this would happen.


I find it impossible to judge the net worth of a church. I do feel however that those churches that are focussed on inclusivity, community service and a fully non-threatening message would do mankind a far greater service if they dropped the irrevocably tainted label "Christian" and called themselves something else.
Which (bold) is exactly how it was marketed in the flyers I saw.

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:11 PM
Well, typically they are, because sponsorship tends to be organised quite a while in advance and is often on the entry form for maximum exposure. So when was the sponsorship determined and announced and why would the player not have been aware of it?

You'd have to ask him, I'm not aware of the circumstance





I find it impossible to judge the net worth of a church. I do feel however that those churches that are focussed on inclusivity, community service and a fully non-threatening message would do mankind a far greater service if they dropped the irrevocably tainted label "Christian" and called themselves something else.

Well thats a problem you're going to have to learn to deal with. I think if you had a better grasp of the subject it would be less problematic for you.

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 11:12 PM
Outreach Church were never a contentious sponsor, we were pleased with their sponsorship and are very grateful for their contribution.

They are obviously a contentious sponsor given that one member of your committee had concerns about the sponsorship and a player has raised concerns about it here. It could be the case that only a tiny minority of players care but I can't remember a case of anyone objecting to a sponsorship since a tiny number of fundies objected over Ansell re the 2002 Olympiad.


Your sentence in bracket doesn't make grammatical sense.

Yeah, the tenses are a total disaster I admit, but let me know if you can't figure out the meaning despite that.


KB, I'm very aware of your personal prejudices and I would be grateful if they could be contained.

I'm very aware of your personal prejudices in favour of weak, illogical, dubious and melodramatic arguments and if you and other posters contain such prejudices, I shall in return contain mine!

Desmond
25-06-2006, 11:15 PM
You'd have to ask him, I'm not aware of the circumstance

There was no mention of a religious group in the tournament flyers.

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:16 PM
I notice on the entry form for the event that cheques were payable to Outreach Chess and not the Gold Coast Chess Club or Gardiner Chess.
As such they are far more than a sponsor, they are the organiser.


Good point Bill. Peter asked to organise the events in return for the sponsorship. Peter was a longstanding club member, had filled many roles at the club and he had our confidence. We were delighted he wished to take on the responsibility.

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:21 PM
There was no mention of a religious group in the tournament flyers.

OK Boris, I'll pass on your concerns. What exactly offended you so that we can tread carefully, if that's at all possible?

Desmond
25-06-2006, 11:24 PM
OK Boris, I'll pass on your concerns. What exactly offended you so that we can tread carefully, if that's at all possible?
As I mentioned earlier, I'd be quite happy for the church to make a short speech if it omitted the prayer. I think that this is not unreasonable and the sponser would probably agree to it.

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 11:29 PM
You'd have to ask him, I'm not aware of the circumstance

From what has been said the arrangement existed in advance (otherwise why would cheques have been payable to "Outreach Chess"?) but Boris says he didn't know there was a religious sponsor. [edited: see post 87]

If this is correct then I do hope something can be learned about being upfront about the nature of sponsorship. I would have no problems playing in a tournament sponsored by a moderate and inclusive church and would be very grateful to them for their decision to sponsor chess. I'm sure in this case the failure to be upfront was not intentional.


Well thats a problem you're going to have to learn to deal with. I think if you had a better grasp of the subject it would be less problematic for you.

It's not my problem, it's a perception/marketing problem that the better Christians have because of the disgraceful beliefs and behaviour of some of the worse ones. The less cluey among my fellow unbelievers are very prone to tar all "Christians" with the same brush and a bit of product differentiation would avert this.

You have never demonstrated a convincing grasp of any subject other than medicine so your insults are as feeble as ever.

Bill Gletsos
25-06-2006, 11:32 PM
The entry form can viewed at http://www.gardinerchess.com/brochures/2006/general%20tournaments/gcopen2006.pdf

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:33 PM
From what both Bill and Boris are saying the arrangement existed in advance (otherwise why would cheques have been payable to "Outreach Chess"?) but there was no hint dropped that this was a religious group.

If this is correct then I do hope something can be learned about being upfront about the nature of sponsorship. I would have no problems playing in a tournament sponsored by a moderate and inclusive church and would be very grateful to them for their decision to sponsor chess. I'm sure in this case the failure to be upfront was not intentional.



It's not my problem, it's a perception/marketing problem that the better Christians have because of the disgraceful beliefs and behaviour of some of the worse ones. The less cluey among my fellow unbelievers are very prone to tar all "Christians" with the same brush and a bit of product differentiation would avert this.



This is genuinely a measured response, thanks.

Kevin Bonham
25-06-2006, 11:36 PM
This is genuinely a measured response, thanks.

I also commend your undertaking in post 78.

Garvinator
25-06-2006, 11:36 PM
Sorry to say, but I thought the situation is/was that Outreach Chess is organising the tournament on behalf of the Gold Coast Chess Club with GardinerChess as sponsor.

Therefore, Outreach Chess is the organiser, not a 'sponsor' in the true sense of the word.

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:37 PM
The entry form can viewed at http://www.gardinerchess.com/brochures/2006/general%20tournaments/gcopen2006.pdf

Outreach Church was mentioned a dozen times Boris, I don't know how you could have missed it. I will mention it to Peter. My own idea was the prayer could be said in an antechamber for those who wished to partake. Maybe that would be an accpetable compromise

Cat
25-06-2006, 11:38 PM
Sorry to say, but I thought the situation is/was that Outreach Chess is organising the tournament on behalf of the Gold Coast Chess Club with GardinerChess as sponsor.

Therefore, Outreach Chess is the organiser, not a 'sponsor' in the true sense of the word.

Gardiner Chess usually provides good sponsorship and I expect they would have also made a contribution.

Kevin Bonham
26-06-2006, 12:26 AM
Outreach Church was mentioned a dozen times Boris, I don't know how you could have missed it. I will mention it to Peter. My own idea was the prayer could be said in an antechamber for those who wished to partake. Maybe that would be an accpetable compromise

Actually "Outreach Church" is not mentioned anywhere, but "Outreach Chess" is mentioned as often as you say. The entry form also clearly states that "Outreach Chess" is a ministry and that it is presenting the tournament. It doesn't explicitly state they are a sponsor but if they are presenting the event you'd expect they'd be supporting it to some degree - whether logistic or monetary. If you're going to a tournament that's explicitly presented by a ministry then this sort of thing shouldn't come as a surprise - although I do think Cat's compromise of having prayers outside the playing area is a very good idea.

Based on the entry form I don't see any case to answer here in terms of the advance notice a religious group was involved so I'll go through and correct or add edits where my comments are incorrect.

[edit: this has now been done.]

Desmond
26-06-2006, 07:38 AM
Outreach Church was mentioned a dozen times Boris, I don't know how you could have missed it. I will mention it to Peter. My own idea was the prayer could be said in an antechamber for those who wished to partake. Maybe that would be an accpetable compromise

If I had known that Outreach Church = Outreach Chess then I would agree with you. I did not and I don't think it is obvious at all.

Arrogant-One
26-06-2006, 12:47 PM
Um, I don't want to start a religious debate but (a) I don't think the incidence of homophobia amoung christians would be no higher than the general population. (b) A woman has access to birth control at a chemist (c) There are heaps of non-christian con people all to willing to part the gullible with their cash.
Thanks for sorting Anti-Christ out for me George. Your well reasoned observations have now made him look foolish.

Arrogant-One
26-06-2006, 12:50 PM
I have no problem with sponsors making announcements. If he had advertised that the church meets wherever and whenever ... no problems. Giving a prayer is going to far though IMO.
Hogwash! I had absolutely no problem with the prayer. The fact you are whinging about it shows that you are far too precious.

Arrogant-One
26-06-2006, 12:53 PM
But the church puts themselves up as a basis of morality and it is prescribed in their stupid book.
No it doesn't! Where did you pull this load from AC?

All churches freely acknowledge that all their members are vile sinners in need of redemption.

Arrogant-One
26-06-2006, 12:57 PM
Peter Bender's Outreach Church sponsored the Gold Coast Open. They requested permission to say a prayer prior to proceedings. One of our seniors on the committee raised an objection to this and so a committee convened to discuss the relative merits.

Both sides put their case but in the event it was agreed that the Church be treated like any other sponsor. As such it was felt a prayer was no different to any other company pitch, which is commonplace in sponsored sporting events. Peter was very sensitive to the concerns raised and in my experience always conducts himself professionally.

Personally I've witnessed many company pitches which have been quite ugly. For me, the right to say a prayer was pretty tame if not even touching.

How do you know all of this Cat?

I will certainly agree with you on this point, "Peter was very sensitive to the concerns raised and in my experience always conducts himself professionally."

I think certain state chess association council members would do themselves a favour by trying to emulate Peter Bender. He is a fine individual and the Gold Coast chess community is lucky to have him.

Arrogant-One
26-06-2006, 01:00 PM
why not, most players usually pray for divine guidance to save their sorry asses during their games :P
I will present proof of this in Grandmaster Theatre Garvin. :P

Arrogant-One
26-06-2006, 01:07 PM
But the parents had no choice sice there was no warning.

Okay, lets suppose a parent is as uptight about this issue as Boris. Couldn't that parent have said 'Wait, I wish to remove my children from the premises so that they don't hear the prayer."?

If any parent had done this I am sure their wishes would have been respected. I don't recall that happeneing though.

Arrogant-One
26-06-2006, 01:22 PM
You have never demonstrated a convincing grasp of any subject other than medicine so your insults are as feeble as ever.
I didn't think Cat insulted you at all Kevin. Perhaps the reason you feel that way is because you know Cat is correct with most of what he has said in this thread?

Kevin Bonham
26-06-2006, 06:09 PM
I didn't think Cat insulted you at all Kevin.

Cat insulted my ability to contribute to discussion of the applicability of the term "Christian" by falsely suggesting I had insufficient understanding of the nature of Christianity to do so. Obviously I know quite a deal about the beliefs and conduct of the worst sorts of so-called "Christians" that gives me a basis for my comment - otherwise I would never have formed the view I expressed in the first place!


Perhaps the reason you feel that way is because you know Cat is correct with most of what he has said in this thread?

Perhaps if that piece of unsubstantiated wishful thinking is the best you can do you'd be best off staying out of this.

(Naaah, scrub the "perhaps" and make it a "certainly" :P )


Hogwash! I had absolutely no problem with the prayer.

Given that you believe in God, are we meant to be surprised by this revelation or consider it relevant?


No it doesn't! Where did you pull this load from AC?

All churches freely acknowledge that all their members are vile sinners in need of redemption.

That is not inconsistent with what antichrist said.

antichrist
26-06-2006, 06:34 PM
No it doesn't! Where did you pull this load from AC?..

It is in the Bible to kill homosexuals and many others whole religions consider deviants. During the Inquisition the churches had them sliced down the middle beginning at their sexual organs where the sin originates from.
need of redemption.

Many other instances but have to go to chess night shortly.

Oepty
26-06-2006, 06:37 PM
I don't think a prayer should have been given without reasonable prior notice. If you go to a religous event, or place of worship you should expect there to a prayers of some sort. In other places well you don't so a warning would be good. I don't think I would have wanted to party to the prayer and I probably would have left the room if I was present, even if this meant causing a disturbance. I probably would not play in a church sponsored tournament anyway.
As far as the sponsorship/ organiser tag goes, Peter Bender was both in the same way the Jenni Oliver has had she company runs sponsor things as well. I can't see why a person cannot or should not be both.
Scott

antichrist
26-06-2006, 06:49 PM
I think there should be public announcements - BEWARE IGNORANCE AND SUPERSTITON AHEAD

Desmond
26-06-2006, 07:32 PM
AO, if you had simply read the thread from start to finish you would have found the answers to your questions contained therein. Cat has agreed to bring up the subject with Outreach Chess (Church). I have found him to be very reasonable and for me the issue is over.

arosar
26-06-2006, 07:33 PM
I only just started reading this thread. It is very concerning that we have this religious organisation sponsoring this event and particularly since they conducted prayer. It is also very concerning that this sponsorship is not given upfront. Let's get one thing straight. A sponsor has one objective: to publicise themselves and to acquire customers/members.

What exactly is Cat's position in the Gold Coast CC? Somebody please tell me this immediately before he deletes his statements. And what is Cat's real full name?

These developments are very alarming.

Thanks,

AR

Bill Gletsos
26-06-2006, 07:52 PM
And what is Cat's real full name?You have been on this BB long enough Amiel to know that Cat is David Richards.

Basil
26-06-2006, 08:12 PM
I think certain state chess association council members would do themselves a favour by trying to emulate Peter Bender. He is a fine individual.
Alex, Peter wrote to me regarding the "no confidence" vote in you. Did he copy you in? He was 'round at my place last weekend for the CAQ council meeting. I should have asked him.

Blow hard.

arosar
26-06-2006, 08:18 PM
You have been on this BB long enough Amiel to know that Cat is David Richards.

Bill, make sure that we keep our sanity here in NSW and not allow these religious mob to sponsor our events. We have to keep our events secular. I mean, after all, we have Hindus, Muslims, Zoroastrians, and those precious atheists as members.

Anyway, with all that $80K + interest, we shouldn't need this kind of desperation and to have our members be at the mercy of religious propaganda. Thank God for that!

AR

Cat
26-06-2006, 08:21 PM
I only just started reading this thread. It is very concerning that we have this religious organisation sponsoring this event and particularly since they conducted prayer. It is also very concerning that this sponsorship is not given upfront. Let's get one thing straight. A sponsor has one objective: to publicise themselves and to acquire customers/members.

What exactly is Cat's position in the Gold Coast CC? Somebody please tell me this immediately before he deletes his statements. And what is Cat's real full name?

These developments are very alarming.

Thanks,

AR

i suppose al qaeda's out of the question then?

bergil
26-06-2006, 08:23 PM
i suppose al qaeda's out of the question then?
They want an appearance fee try JI ;)

Cat
26-06-2006, 08:23 PM
You have been on this BB long enough Amiel to know that Cat is David Richards.

Geez you've blown my cover!! You realise you could be putting my wife & kids at risk. Identifying office holder of other states has major securiy implications.

Bill Gletsos
26-06-2006, 08:24 PM
Bill, make sure that we keep our sanity here in NSW and not allow these religious mob to sponsor our events. We have to keep our events secular. I mean, after all, we have Hindus, Muslims, Zoroastrians, and those precious atheists as members.

Anyway, with all that $80K + interest, we shouldn't need this kind of desperation and to have our members be at the mercy of religious propaganda. Thank God for that!I can just picture you now explaining that point of view to St. Peter at the Pearly Gates. ;)

AR: But I'm the ClosetGrandmaster, I'm famous in my own mind.
SP: The closet what?
AR: Mate, I'm the Pinoy blogster from the land down under.
SP: Well why didnt you say so. Say hello to St. Nick for me. (as he zaps you off to to Heavens land way down down down under)
St. Nick: Well if it isnt the ClosetGrandmaster. i've been waiting to get my hands on you.
AR: Oh Hell FMD.

:lol: :hand:

Cat
26-06-2006, 08:25 PM
Bill, make sure that we keep our sanity here in NSW and not allow these religious mob to sponsor our events. We have to keep our events secular. I mean, after all, we have Hindus, Muslims, Zoroastrians, and those precious atheists as members.

Anyway, with all that $80K + interest, we shouldn't need this kind of desperation and to have our members be at the mercy of religious propaganda. Thank God for that!

AR

Ameil, I am not David Richards, I don't know a David Richards and any allegations of the kind are deliberately misleading.

Cat
26-06-2006, 08:56 PM
I only just started reading this thread. It is very concerning that we have this religious organisation sponsoring this event and particularly since they conducted prayer. It is also very concerning that this sponsorship is not given upfront. Let's get one thing straight. A sponsor has one objective: to publicise themselves and to acquire customers/members.

What exactly is Cat's position in the Gold Coast CC? Somebody please tell me this immediately before he deletes his statements. And what is Cat's real full name?

These developments are very alarming.

Thanks,

AR

Ok my real name is Emmanuel Goldstein and I am the Grand Wizard at the GCCC, otherwise known as 'The Lodge'

Arrogant-One
27-06-2006, 02:03 PM
Kevin,

You clearly enjoyed the latest hanging - this time it was PHAT. Now you are looking for your next BB victim.

I won't accept your invitation. Try Howard Duggan. :P

Arrogant-One
27-06-2006, 02:04 PM
Many other instances but have to go to chess night shortly.

I didn't state the second sentence you quote me as stating AC.

Arrogant-One
27-06-2006, 02:08 PM
Alex, Peter wrote to me regarding the "no confidence" vote in you. Did he copy you in? He was 'round at my place last weekend for the CAQ council meeting. I should have asked him.

Blow hard.

I am sure he hasn't been privy to several bits of your vile emails and resignation letter Howard. I am happy to meet with him personally and show him when the No Confidence motion was initiated (ie. when I brought up Ian's conflict of interest) and all other correspondence.

I also note that I wasn't invited to the CAQ meeting where the Crest debacle in which the CAQ lost substantial money was 'discussed'. This despite my repeatedly expressed wishes for such.

Desmond
27-06-2006, 02:10 PM
AO, stop beating the drum (and other things). Nobody cares :eek:

Basil
27-06-2006, 02:14 PM
I am sure he hasn't been privy to several bits of your vile emails and resignation letter Howard. I am happy to meet with him personally and show him when the No Confidence motion was initiated (ie. when I brought up Ian's conflict of interest) and all other correspondence.
You have my permission to do all of the above, pending others' approval. I think he might already know :rolleyes:


I also note that I wasn't invited to the CAQ meeting That's right. This topic was raised at the meeting AFTER we had put you out with the trash.


where the Crest debacle in which the CAQ lost substantial money was 'discussed'.
Just clarify this for me. Sounds like a statement or an alleagtion. I'll give you as much rope as you want. But you'll have to be a little clearer in what you are saying.
Would you care to elaborate on 'debacle' or 'substantial'?

Arrogant-One
27-06-2006, 02:24 PM
But you'll have to be a little clearer in what you are saying. Would you care to elaborate on 'debacle' or 'substantial'?

Are you really sure that you want to re-dig this all up? Now that I am no longer working I actually have time to play with you Howard.

Basil
27-06-2006, 02:26 PM
Are you really sure that you want to re-dig this all up? Now that I am no longer working I actually have time to play with you Howard.
Do what you wish. Don't trip over your boot-laces on the way.

Arrogant-One
27-06-2006, 02:32 PM
Do what you wish. Don't trip over your boot-laces on the way.
I am wondering whether its worth it as you are going to quit at the end of the year anyway, and Ian also has a date with the bleachers while some 'committed and intelligent people' take over and move the CAQ in a positive direction for a change.

four four two
27-06-2006, 02:44 PM
I only just started reading this thread. It is very concerning that we have this religious organisation sponsoring this event and particularly since they conducted prayer. It is also very concerning that this sponsorship is not given upfront. Let's get one thing straight. A sponsor has one objective: to publicise themselves and to acquire customers/members.

What exactly is Cat's position in the Gold Coast CC? Somebody please tell me this immediately before he deletes his statements. And what is Cat's real full name?

These developments are very alarming.

Thanks,

AR

What I find interesting is how people are opposed to a religious organisation sponsoring a chess tournament but dont seem to have a problem when an alcohol advertiser is plastered all over a tournament flier.

The 2004 MtBuller Australian Open tournament brochure was full of ads for alcohol...even though quite a few competitors were going to be juniors who were under the legal drinking age. As Amiel points out sponsors publicise themselves to acquire customers/members...so on that basis they were hoping to make an impression on junior chess players and to glamorise their alcohol products so as to influence their future drinking choices.

This in my opinion is far worse than a religious organisation that is actually involved in chess on a long term basis.
While I feel the prayer was a bit over the top,the flier...if carefully read, points out that Outreach chess[the sponsor] is a ministry of the Nerang community church.
I dont believe Outreach chess were trying to hide who they were and what their motives for sponsorship were.

Arrogant-One
27-06-2006, 02:46 PM
What I find interesting is how people are opposed to a religious organisation sponsoring a chess tournament but dont seem to have a problem when an alcohol advertiser is plastered all over a tournament flier.

The 2004 MtBuller Australian Open tournament brochure was full of ads for alcohol...even though quite a few competitors were going to be juniors who were under the legal drinking age. As Amiel points out sponsors publicise themselves to acquire customers/members...so on that basis they were hoping to make an impression on junior chess players and to glamorise their alcohol products so as to influence their future drinking choices.

This in my opinion is far worse than a religious organisation that is actually involved in chess on a long term basis.
While I feel the prayer was a bit over the top,the flier...if carefully read, points out that Outreach chess[the sponsor] is a ministry of the Nerang community church.
I dont believe Outreach chess were trying to hide who they were and what their motives for sponsorship were.
I agree substantially with 442 except in one respect.

Hey 442, did you know there is a magazine named after you? Its a golfing magazine, I saw a copy yesterday!

bergil
27-06-2006, 02:57 PM
What I find interesting is how people are opposed to a religious organisation sponsoring a chess tournament but dont seem to have a problem when an alcohol advertiser is plastered all over a tournament flier.

The 2004 MtBuller Australian Open tournament brochure was full of ads for alcohol...even though quite a few competitors were going to be juniors who were under the legal drinking age. As Amiel points out sponsors publicise themselves to acquire customers/members...so on that basis they were hoping to make an impression on junior chess players and to glamorise their alcohol products so as to influence their future drinking choices.

This in my opinion is far worse than a religious organisation that is actually involved in chess on a long term basis.
While I feel the prayer was a bit over the top,the flier...if carefully read, points out that Outreach chess[the sponsor] is a ministry of the Nerang community church.
I dont believe Outreach chess were trying to hide who they were and what their motives for sponsorship were.
Hey Hey Hey, lets leave the grog alone. I had a mate who worked for that company and tried to get him to do the same up here and he said they would never sponsor chess again. :wall:

four four two
27-06-2006, 03:54 PM
I agree substantially with 442 except in one respect.

Hey 442, did you know there is a magazine named after you? Its a golfing magazine, I saw a copy yesterday!

Alex,I think you will find it is a soccer magazine. There is both a british and australian version of this magazine...the australian version was launched last year.;)

What part of my post do you disagree with Alex?:hmm:

four four two
27-06-2006, 03:59 PM
Hey Hey Hey, lets leave the grog alone. I had a mate who worked for that company and tried to get him to do the same up here and he said they would never sponsor chess again. :wall:

Bergil,there are plenty of legitimate sponsors out there who could sponsor chess...we dont need alcohol companies...or tobacco companies for that manner.;)

Brian_Jones
27-06-2006, 04:09 PM
Bergil,there are plenty of legitimate sponsors out there ...we dont need alcohol companies...

With that attitude the Rugby League State of Origin series would be a non-starter. I would love to see xxxx sponsor chess in Queensland.

Why do you wish to impose your personal stuff on the rest of us?

bergil
27-06-2006, 04:26 PM
Bergil,there are plenty of legitimate sponsors out there who could sponsor chess...we dont need alcohol companies...or tobacco companies for that manner.;)
Dream on holier than thou, its they that don't need us! :hand:

Garvinator
27-06-2006, 04:34 PM
Regarding alcohol and tobacco sponsorship: I am sure government legislation would make it difficult to obtain in the sooner/later future anyways. So really a non-starter.

bergil
27-06-2006, 04:44 PM
Regarding alcohol and tobacco sponsorship: I am sure government legislation would make it difficult to obtain in the sooner/later future anyways. So really a non-starter.
Tobacco sure but why would alcohol be ban from sponsorship? :hmm:

four four two
27-06-2006, 04:51 PM
With that attitude the Rugby League State of Origin series would be a non-starter. I would love to see xxxx sponsor chess in Queensland.

Why do you wish to impose your personal stuff on the rest of us?

I wasnt trying to "impose" my personal views on anyone Brian...I was simply trying to illustrate the moral high ground that some people have taken in regards to Outreach chess sponsoring the Gold coast open.

If a religious group...which is actually involved in chess outside of this event...is a "bad sponsor",then why would an alcohol company...who doesnt have a regular involvement in chess ...be any less "corrupting"?:hmm:

If the church group is out to "corrupt" people,then the alcohol company...whose products can not be legally consumed by junior chessplayers,would be no less "corrupting". :hand: The double standard here should be obvious for even you to see Brian.

While I dont personally categorise chess as a sport,I do feel it is inappropiate to market products that are clearly adult products to an audience that you know is going to have many children involved. The argument that we cant find child friendly sponsors for events that involve a reasonable amount of children has well and truly been knocked on the head by the anti-smoking lobby.

As for the State of Origin...if Queensland and NSW were to ban alcohol companies from sponsoring this event there would be plenty of large australian companies that would jump at the oppurtunity to sponsor this event...even if the blues continue to dominate the contest.:lol:

four four two
27-06-2006, 05:14 PM
Dream on holier than thou, its they that don't need us! :hand:

Bergil...dont get me wrong here. I dont have a problem with adults smoking or drinking. I just dont think we need alcohol and tobacco companies involved as sponsors in chess events where you know about half the field are going to be kids.
If it was going to be a closed event with only a small group of adults competing...like a GM tournament,then that would be a different matter.

Here is a short list of well known companies that we could easily approach for sponsorship rather than tobacco and alcohol companies...

Qantas,Virgin Blue,NAB,CBA,WestPac,ANZ,StGeorge Bank,AMP insurance company,Aussie home loans,Ford,Holden,Toyota,Uncle Tobys,Vodaphone/Telstra/Optus[yes I know mobile phones is ironic],Foxtel,DonutKing,CadburySchweppes,etc....

Garvinator
27-06-2006, 05:16 PM
Qantas,Virgin Blue,NAB,CBA,WestPac,ANZ,StGeorge Bank,AMP insurance company,Aussie home loans,Ford,Holden,Toyota,Uncle Tobys,Vodaphone/Telstra/Optus[yes I know mobile phones is ironic],Foxtel,DonutKing,CadburySchweppes,etc....
which is worse, an alcohol company or a bank :P

bergil
27-06-2006, 05:25 PM
Bergil...dont get me wrong here. I dont have a problem with adults smoking or drinking. I just dont think we need alcohol and tobacco companies involved as sponsors in chess events where you know about half the field are going to be kids.
If it was going to be a closed event with only a small group of adults competing...like a GM tournament,then that would be a different matter.

Here is a short list of well known companies that we could easily approach for sponsorship rather than tobacco and alcohol companies...

Qantas,Virgin Blue,NAB,CBA,WestPac,ANZ,StGeorge Bank,AMP insurance company,Aussie home loans,Ford,Holden,Toyota,Uncle Tobys,Vodaphone/Telstra/Optus[yes I know mobile phones is ironic],Foxtel,DonutKing,CadburySchweppes,etc....
I can't and don't agree with you, if this is a open tournament for adults but allows juniors then parental descression must rule on what is ok for their kids.

All this PC tripe has gone to far. We are not giving out shots of scotch every round and giving the kiddies a 6 pack to take home for later. :hand:

Please tell me how many of those businesses have sponsored chess before and before you reply, how many of those have you got to sponsor a tournament for you?

four four two
27-06-2006, 06:23 PM
I can't and don't agree with you, if this is a open tournament for adults but allows juniors then parental descression must rule on what is ok for their kids.

All this PC tripe has gone to far. We are not giving out shots of scotch every round and giving the kiddies a 6 pack to take home for later. :hand:

Please tell me how many of those businesses have sponsored chess before and before you reply, how many of those have you got to sponsor a tournament for you?

I havnt been directly involved in getting a sponsor for a chess tournament...then again neither have 99.99% of chessplayers either.
Qantas has sponsored chess in Australia before...so its not implausible they would again. All of those sponsors are just as plausible as potential sponsors as any tobacco or alcohol company in Australia. The tournament in Elwood last year,sponsored by the Bendigo Bank,is a perfect example of such a company.

As for parental discretion...if this tournament was sponsored by XXXX or Bundaberg Rum and they had company posters spread all over the venue...and many parents decided to withdraw their kids from the event because of this...you would have lost about half of the field!:lol:

Companies marketing products to children that can only legally used by adults isnt PC tripe,its a common marketing tool used worldwide. And there is a reason why they do it...there own research shows that its effective at getting children to think positively about their product and repeated exposure to brand name recognition does help shape future consumption.

This I might add is why tobacco advertising to children has been eliminated and why there are a number of legal restrictions as to how alcohol can be advertised in Australia.

firegoat7
30-06-2006, 03:31 PM
OK, so suppose I contact MCC and offer to throw in $5 for exclusive naming rights for your next weekender. The committee, figuring that based on the turnout of six to their last event that's the best they're going to get, accepts my offer. The tournament gets named the Beaumont Should Have Got A Lifetime Ban Open and before play all players get to listen to a taped 30-minute recording of me lecturing on the virtues of thread-splitting. I'm sure that you would not complain at all, not a whimper, no siree!

Bonbot,
You are truly a delusional extremist.

This non-argument of yours has nothing to do with what we are talking about.
Only a total moron would try to make a comparative moral analysis between what happened at the Gold Coast and your inept extreme example. Go and see a Doctor before you do yourself more self harm.:clap:

May I suggest that you should attempt your extreme moral example. In fact I will chip in $10 for you to do so. I will even personally hand any proposal to the MCC for you. It would be worth the laugh. At least people will realise how much of a complete nutter you really are, and hopefully you will realise how little people will be interested in your offbeat stupid ideas.

cheers Fg7

Kevin Bonham
30-06-2006, 07:23 PM
Bonbot,You are truly a delusional extremist.

Spoken like a real delusional extremist. Goose.


This non-argument of yours has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Only a total moron would try to make a comparative moral analysis between what happened at the Gold Coast and your inept extreme example.

Extreme or not, it is much the same principle, which is why you are spouting abuse and claptrap instead of making any attempt to address it.


May I suggest that you should attempt your extreme moral example.

Whether my example should be attempted or not was not the point of my argument. The point, which you are of course gutlessly evading, is how you would react if such a proposal was accepted.

*remaining off-the-track twittery ignored*

firegoat7
01-07-2006, 01:36 PM
Extreme or not, it is much the same principle, which is why you are spouting abuse and claptrap instead of making any attempt to address it.

I am glad to hear that you accept your position is extremist nonsense as a moral argument:hand:
Let us just clarify one point for your. Regardless of whether you believe in religion or not, plenty of people do. To say that people who believe in religion are adopting an extreme position is false. Instead what your argument shows is that in a plural society you have little tolerance of anybody who does not hole the same views as you. I guess that makes you a Face.




Whether my example should be attempted or not was not the point of my argument. The point, which you are of course gutlessly evading, is how you would react if such a proposal was accepted.


Of course your non-argument is pointless. Everybody can see that! The problem with fanatics like yourself is that they believe that their beliefs are the only valuable beliefs in a society. Clearly only a self obsessed idiot would even attempt to link such a poorly constructed non argument based on a comparative moral analysis that is not even relevant or representative of any normal consensus.

cheers Fg7

Kevin Bonham
01-07-2006, 01:50 PM
I am glad to hear that you accept your position is extremist nonsense as a moral argument:hand:

You are confusing the concepts "extreme" and "extremist". A person who uses extremity on occasion is not necessarily an extremist. In any case I did not say any such thing; I said "extreme or not".


Let us just clarify one point for your. Regardless of whether you believe in religion or not, plenty of people do. To say that people who believe in religion are adopting an extreme position is false.

This is irrelevant as I have not said that, nor is the issue at dispute.


Instead what your argument shows is that in a plural society you have little tolerance of anybody who does not hole the same views as you.

This is both a likely misuse of the word "tolerance" and a complete non sequitur. Please define the word "tolerance" as you have used it.


I guess that makes you a Face.

I have no idea what you are talking about. Please don't explain - just crawl off into a corner and froth and bubble at yourself.


Of course your non-argument is pointless. Everybody can see that!

It has hardly been inundated with flames to that effect. The opposition of someone with a known deepseated personal grudge against me (you) is meaningless.

*remainder was unsubstantiated wibble as usual*

fianchetto
01-07-2006, 03:12 PM
My experiences at the tournament? Gladly.
... I do object to a priest (or equivalent) giving a blessing/prayer as an anouncement before the start of the first round. I found that to be highly inappropriate, and if I had children playing in it, they would have been removed.
I don't understand why it bothers you that a priest give blessing before the game. :hmm: I almost always hear my opponent before the first move saying "GOOD LUCK". Should I tell him it's annoying and shut up?

Basil
01-07-2006, 03:15 PM
I don't understand why it bothers you that a priest give blessing before the game. :hmm: I almost always heard my opponent before the first move saying "GOOD LUCK" before the game. Should I tell him it's annoying and shut up?

ooo ... ooo ... Mr Beazley. That's a good point!

Desmond
01-07-2006, 08:26 PM
I don't understand why it bothers you that a priest give blessing before the game. :hmm: I almost always hear my opponent before the first move saying "GOOD LUCK". Should I tell him it's annoying and shut up?
This has already been debated for 10 pages. read them all, and then you should understand.

fianchetto
01-07-2006, 09:11 PM
Do you protest should someone say "GOOD LUCK" before the start of the game.???. Bless you Boris...

Desmond
01-07-2006, 09:14 PM
Do you protest should someone say "GOOD LUCK" before the start of the game.???. Bless you Boris...
Perhaps you should take this fascinating question to a new thread since it has no relevance here.

Alan Shore
10-07-2006, 09:29 PM
Hey, you guys in this thread should like this:

http://www.vgcats.com/comics/?strip_id=200

Desmond
24-07-2006, 10:10 AM
Cat, do you know if there will be a prayer at the start of the NVDG? This will decide whether I play or not.

Garrett
24-07-2006, 06:18 PM
Cat, do you know if there will be a prayer at the start of the NVDG? This will decide whether I play or not.
It says in Garvin's thread that there will be a blessing so I'd say yes.

Desmond
24-07-2006, 06:46 PM
It says in Garvin's thread that there will be a blessing so I'd say yes.
Ah yes, I see that too. I won't hijack Garvin's thread, but suffice is to say that you will not find me at the tourney.

Cat
24-07-2006, 08:50 PM
Cat, do you know if there will be a prayer at the start of the NVDG? This will decide whether I play or not.

There's a GCCC meeting this thursday, I was hoping to go to - God willing, I should have an answer for you.

Desmond
25-07-2006, 08:31 AM
There's a GCCC meeting this thursday, I was hoping to go to - God willing, I should have an answer for you.
Nice one, but you forgot "God bless", "heavan knows", and Lord only knows how many others.

Don't worry about finding out; I have my answer. Just be sure to pass on that they have lost 2 entries fees needlessly, plus goodness knows how many others.

I'm voting with my feet. All together now >>> The feet bone's connected to the wallet bone.

Garvinator
25-07-2006, 10:04 AM
Nice one, but you forgot "God bless", "heavan knows", and Lord only knows how many others.

Don't worry about finding out; I have my answer. Just be sure to pass on that they have lost 2 entries fees needlessly, plus goodness knows how many others.

I'm voting with my feet. All together now >>> The feet bone's connected to the wallet bone.
2? who is the other?

Desmond
25-07-2006, 10:24 AM
2? who is the other?
He doesn't want to be named. Either take my word for it or don't.

Garvinator
25-07-2006, 10:27 AM
He doesn't want to be named. Either take my word for it or don't.
Thats ok. Just thought you might have been thinking I was the other person.

Garrett
25-07-2006, 04:26 PM
Well put it this way - I will be playing.

I have played in tourneys where a politician was a sponser and he gave a bit of a spiel (Keith Wright no less), I have played in tourneys where companies have sponsored and spread banners around procaliming their might. I have also had to play in an Australian title event at the Myer Center in Brisbane because they were a sponser (think about how suitable that was).

If I can handle all these things then I can put up with a little prayer before the Gold Coast tourney. I believe these people are trying to make a postive difference. Some things need to be viewed in perspective...

Cheers
George.

Garrett
25-07-2006, 04:27 PM
Pardon me, that was a Qld title at the Myer Center.

Garvinator
26-07-2006, 01:39 PM
I moved this from the Blood on Hands thread (because no one should have to read that unless they really want to).


You know there's a thread about some blokes having problems with Christian sponsorship of an event.

I hate misrepresentation, even when the facts have been plainly spelt out.
The christian sponsorship isnt the point of concern at all. Outreach Chess have been sponsoring chess tournaments for a while :clap:, with not a problem in sight.
The issue is the religious blessing/prayer before the tournament, which occurred for the first time and without warning at the Gold Coast Open.

arosar
26-07-2006, 01:42 PM
And now we have to ask: should we have this religious sponsorship? Let's not kid ourselves OK. They're there to acquire new members. They make themselves known to you so you maybe think about them. It's publicity OK gray, advertising.

AR

Ian Murray
26-07-2006, 02:48 PM
I have played in tourneys where a politician was a sponser and he gave a bit of a spiel (Keith Wright no less)
The good old days!

Signing up Keith Wright as a sponsor was one of my masterstrokes, perhaps dampened somewhat when he was later tried and convicted for paedophilia.

Ian Murray
26-07-2006, 02:51 PM
Come to think of it, these are the good old days.

Just wait and see :)

MichaelBaron
26-07-2006, 06:20 PM
Thx God for any sponsorship we can get :)

Desmond
26-07-2006, 07:53 PM
Thx God for any sponsorship we can get :)
Well done. Give that man a prize. :rolleyes:

Better add it to the list in #147.

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 08:28 PM
The christian sponsorship isnt the point of concern at all. Outreach Chess have been sponsoring chess tournaments for a while :clap:, with not a problem in sight.

Do you mean to say that Boris did not complain so vehemently when Outreach Chess were simply seen but not heard?

Basil
26-07-2006, 08:35 PM
Do you mean to say that Boris did not complain so vehemently when Outreach Chess were simply seen but not heard?

I believe the answer is "yes" because Boris, bless his heart, only objects to having to watch the movie - not that the movie was made.

I will grant you that Boris is slightly mad, but not bad.

OK, he's very mad. Mad as a hatter actually. Have you read his politics? :) But not bad. Damn, I am going to be punished for this.

Desmond
26-07-2006, 08:37 PM
Do you mean to say that Boris did not complain so vehemently when Outreach Chess were simply seen but not heard?
Is that a trick question?

Given that what I complained about was spoken, being heard would appear to be a pre-requisite.

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 08:43 PM
Is that a trick question?

Given that what I complained about was spoken, being heard would appear to be a pre-requisite.

So you were quite happy to be a financial beneficiary of Outreach Chess, but unhappy when a short prayer was uttered at the start of the tournament?

Hypocrite.

Desmond
26-07-2006, 08:46 PM
So you were quite happy to be a financial beneficiary of Outreach Chess, but unhappy when a short prayer was uttered at the start of the tournament?

Hypocrite.
Have you read the whole thread?

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 08:50 PM
I have. In fact, I would suggest that the very first post in this thread highlights your hypocrisy all the more clearly.

Desmond
26-07-2006, 09:01 PM
I have. In fact, I would suggest that the very first post in this thread highlights your hypocrisy all the more clearly.
So then, you are aware that I played in the tournament for only the first day. Since this gave me no chance of winning a cash prize, exactly how did I benefit from the tournament financially?

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 09:16 PM
Where does it say that you withdrew on the thread and what the circumstances of your early withdrawal?

Desmond
26-07-2006, 09:19 PM
Where does it say that you withdrew on the thread and what the circumstances of your early withdrawal?
Where does it say that I won a prize or benefited financially?

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 09:33 PM
Where does it say that I won a prize or benefited financially?

Clearly not an answer to my question but merely an evasion of it.

You suggested that because I had read the entirety of the thread that I would know that you withdrew from the tournament early. There's nothing there ...

Desmond
26-07-2006, 09:40 PM
Clearly not an answer to my question but merely an evasion of it.Takes one to know one.


You suggested that because I had read the entirety of the thread that I would know that you withdrew from the tournament early. There's nothing there ...
If you would care to substantiate your previous claim that I gained financially from Outreach Chess's sponsorship, I may be inclined to answer. Since you can't or won't, either retract the statement or do your own research.

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 09:46 PM
Takes one to know one.

How old are you Boris? Five?


If you would care to substantiate your previous claim that I gained financially from Outreach Chess's sponsorship, I may be inclined to answer. Since you can't or won't, either retract the statement or do your own research.

I never suggested that you financially benefited from Outreach Chess' sponsorship - merely that you potentially could have and that you would have gladly accepted any such financial benefit.

Oh yes, why did you withdraw from the tournament again?

Hypocrite.

Desmond
26-07-2006, 09:53 PM
How old are you Boris? Five?I am 27. Who are you and how old are you?



I never suggested that you financially benefited from Outreach Chess' sponsorship - merely that you potentially could have and that you would have gladly accepted any such financial benefit.

Oh yes, why did you withdraw from the tournament again?

Hypocrite.
Do you have a comprehension problem? I could not have benefited financially since I only played the first day.

Still calling me a hypocrite? Why are you bringing all this up? It has all been discussed at some length.

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 09:56 PM
Do you have a comprehension problem? I could not have benefited financially since I only played the first day.

Why did you withdraw?

Desmond
26-07-2006, 09:57 PM
Why did you withdraw?
Why should I allow you to analyse my private life when you will not give me the decency of telling me your name?

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 10:00 PM
Why should I allow you to analyse my private life when you will not give me the decency of telling me your name?

Perhaps I shall ask a different question that isn't quite so "private". What was your score when you withdrew?

Desmond
26-07-2006, 10:09 PM
Perhaps I shall ask a different question that isn't quite so "private". What was your score when you withdrew?
Are we playing the let's-see-how-many-questions-in-a-row-we-can-ask-without-either-of-us-answering-one game?

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 10:14 PM
Are we playing the let's-see-how-many-questions-in-a-row-we-can-ask-without-either-of-us-answering-one game?

No (an answer to your question), but I do find your refusal to answer what score you were on when you withdrew quite intriguing ...

Desmond
26-07-2006, 10:21 PM
No (an answer to your question), but I do find your refusal to answer what score you were on when you withdrew quite intriguing ...
Do you? Intruiging enough to look it up yourself?

http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=109041&postcount=74

Only 1 player played the first day only. I'll let you do the math yourself.

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 10:34 PM
Do you? Intruiging enough to look it up yourself?

http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=109041&postcount=74

Only 1 player played the first day only. I'll let you do the math yourself.

Well, that wasn't too hard, was it?

Now, if only we can get to the issue of why you withdrew, we might be able to shed some clarity on the matter.

Desmond
26-07-2006, 10:39 PM
Well, that wasn't too hard, was it?

Evidently it was too hard for you.

Now, if only we can get to the issue of why you withdrew, we might be able to shed some clarity on the matter.
Not really. It should be pretty obvious to you that the reason was not because of the prayer (obvious because I didn't walk out at the time), and that I was definetly still in contention for prizes (in fact, my performance was significantly above my rating). And as I already pointed out, it was a personal matter.

So, who are you?

Garvinator
26-07-2006, 10:41 PM
So you were quite happy to be a financial beneficiary of Outreach Chess, but unhappy when a short prayer was uttered at the start of the tournament?
Outreach Chess have been sponsoring some of the 'larger' open tournaments in qld for a couple of years. OC have promoted their religious services with information on the flyers and speaking to players during the tournament ie one on one, about what services they provide, who they help in the community etc etc. That is not an issue at all and I approve of it :clap:

They have taken over the running this year of the 3 Gold Coast open tournaments (Tin Cup, Gold Coast Open, Nell Van Der Graff Classic).

The issue is the Christian religious blessing of any tournament during the most public of times for a chess tournament, the opening ceremony/start of the tournament.

I can see that some players, parents or the like might think that it is inappropriate to have a religious blessing at the start of the tournament. I dont think anyone would have an issue if OC were to provide facilities for those who wish to join in a religious service for the tournament in another room.

I have heard some people say that the ones who dont want to be part of the religious blessing can leave the room, but is this really an option when it is right before the starting of the clocks for round one and everyone is seated and quiet? Talk about group pressure to just sit there and lump it, instead of getting up and walking out.


Hypocrite. This really was unnecessary.

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 10:48 PM
Outreach Chess have been sponsoring some of the 'larger' open tournaments in qld for a couple of years. OC have promoted their religious services with information on the flyers and speaking to players during the tournament ie one on one, about what services they provide, who they help in the community etc etc. That is not an issue at all and I approve of it :clap:

Just out of interest, has "Boris" competed in any other tournaments sponsored by Outreach Chess? Has he completed them? Did he win any prizes?

Basil
26-07-2006, 10:51 PM
Gough

At post 165, you had already made an assertion which Boris disproved. He asks you a question.
At post 166, You decline to answer, and you ask him a different question.
At post 167, He again pulls you up on your first dodge.
At post 168, you accused him of not answering your questions.
You subsequently pepper him with questions of motives, age and so on.

You are a disingenuous fool. Like fg7 and that other bloke who writes copious quantities of dribble, you won't answer direct questions but ALSO have the hide in broad daylight to accuse the other party of what you do yourself.

You are an obfuscating moron. How many people do you think you are winning over with this line of banality. Are you related to AO?

Desmond
26-07-2006, 10:52 PM
Just out of interest, has "Boris" competed in any other tournaments sponsored by Outreach Chess? Has he completed them? Did he win any prizes?
Just out of interest, are you in the habit of failing to apologise for accusations when they have been shown to be false?

Just out of interest, who are you?

If you can't show yourself to be a decent human being now, my willingness to explain myself to you is at an end.

Goughfather
26-07-2006, 11:40 PM
At post 165, you had already made an assertion which Boris disproved. He asks you a question.

I think you'll find the word you were looking for was "misunderstood" rather than "disproved". I clarify my assertion at post 170, which demonstrates the irrelevance of the abovementioned question.


At post 166, You decline to answer, and you ask him a different question.

At post 166 I demonstrate that the first sentence of post 165 is categorically incorrect. I ask a question.


At post 167, He again pulls you up on your first dodge.

At post 167, Boris ignores the question I asked at post 166, which as you correctly point out, I bring up at post 168.

At point 170 I demonstrate that I had never made the assertion that Boris had accused me of.


You subsequently pepper him with questions of motives

Which is exactly that. A question.


age

I ask this rhetorical question in response to his "takes one to know one" comment, since it seems to be just a little immature.

Now, as it turns out, I may very be, and probably am wrong about suspicions as to why Boris withdrew from the abovementioned tournament. Full closure may be brought to that issue if Boris were to reveal exactly why he withdrew from the tournament. However, Boris suggests that his reason is too private, so I guess I shall have to take him at his word on this issue. Regardless, we have not even ventured into the question of whether Boris intended to play the entire tournament when he entered. If this is indeed the case, my initial assertion would still hold true. But perhaps Boris was always planning to withdraw - he can make that clear himself.

Basil
27-07-2006, 03:17 AM
So you were quite happy to be a financial beneficiary of Outreach Chess, but unhappy when a short prayer was uttered at the start of the tournament?

Hypocrite.

David

You ask a question of Boris by paraphrasing him. The paraphrase is clearly ill-founded as its conclusion can in no way be deduced from the [your asserted] premise. Not only do you commit this sin, you have the hide to call him a hypocrite for it!

10 Hail Marys, on the double, please.

[20 if you try and fudge the issue by claiming both your asserted premise and conclusion are individually correct, [which they are] because you well know the issue is the causal relationship between them, not their individual veracity].


I think you'll find ... justify justify clarify
It's quite a good read and certainly well-constructed, but if we just zip back to the thread, I think you'll find that your approach was as disingenuous and harrassing as I first suggested.


But perhaps Boris was always planning to withdraw
In the name of God, I call upon you to divulge your entire agenda here. Where did you get your inkling for this rather specific and certainly off topic suggestion?

Desmond
27-07-2006, 07:45 AM
Now, as it turns out, I may very be, and probably am wrong about suspicions as to why Boris withdrew from the abovementioned tournament. Full closure may be brought to that issue if Boris were to reveal exactly why he withdrew from the tournament. However, Boris suggests that his reason is too private, so I guess I shall have to take him at his word on this issue. Regardless, we have not even ventured into the question of whether Boris intended to play the entire tournament when he entered. If this is indeed the case, my initial assertion would still hold true. But perhaps Boris was always planning to withdraw - he can make that clear himself.

It is actually surprisingly simple, matey. Either you apologise for your false accustaions against me and tell me who you are or you don't. I'm not sure exactly sure what you're afraid of, but hold the bible in one hand and a cross in the other if this gets you through the night.

You come on here after an 8 month posting absence, make false accusations against me, don't apologise, won't do the decency of telling me who you are, and you want me to justify myself to you? In the real world, conversations are a two way street. You don't want a conversation, you want to throw stones. You are the 5-year old; get some maturity and some backbone and face up to the fact that what you did was wrong. Don't worry, God will forgive you; I will too.

If you are not a decent enough human being to apologise now, then you can :hand:

Garvinator
27-07-2006, 12:54 PM
It is actually surprisingly simple, matey. Either you apologise for your false accustaions against me and tell me who you are or you don't. I'm not sure exactly sure what you're afraid of, but hold the bible in one hand and a cross in the other if this gets you through the night.

You come on here after an 8 month posting absence, make false accusations against me, don't apologise, won't do the decency of telling me who you are, and you want me to justify myself to you? In the real world, conversations are a two way street. You don't want a conversation, you want to throw stones. You are the 5-year old; get some maturity and some backbone and face up to the fact that what you did was wrong. Don't worry, God will forgive you; I will too.

If you are not a decent enough human being to apologise now, then you can :hand:
hasnt come back for seconds yet :P

Kevin Bonham
27-07-2006, 04:28 PM
So you were quite happy to be a financial beneficiary of Outreach Chess, but unhappy when a short prayer was uttered at the start of the tournament?

Hypocrite.

I don't see how this is hypocritical at all. It's quite reasonable for someone to say they are willing to accept the financial support of a body but only under certain conditions. It's equally reasonable for that body to decide that those conditions aren't acceptable and that it is only willing to run an event on certain terms.

Desmond
27-07-2006, 07:38 PM
I don't see how this is hypocritical at all. It's quite reasonable for someone to say they are willing to accept the financial support of a body but only under certain conditions. It's equally reasonable for that body to decide that those conditions aren't acceptable and that it is only willing to run an event on certain terms.
Quite right. In fact, as I have mentioned here I won't be playing in the next Outreach Chess event now that the prayer is known to me in advance.

It is also noteworthy that goughfather makes a point to put my name in quotation marks (in #181). It appears that he is the one who wants to keep his identity secret.

I'm guessing that makes goughfather a hypocrite^2.

EGOR
28-07-2006, 11:37 AM
The conclusion is that if a church or any other religious group wants to sponser an event and make a prayer or some kind of blessing at the start a condition of that sponsership, it is their choice to make. However, such prayer/blessing should be made known in advance so that those objecting to such prayer/blessings can choose not to be a part of the event if they wish.
So concludes this thread.:whistle:

MichaelBaron
28-07-2006, 02:24 PM
It is an internationally acceptable practice for religious organisations to fund events and community activities as long as these events and activities are appolitical (e.g. not aimed at challenging law and order). If a church can hold a Bingo night, why not let them organize a chess tournament:hmm:

Desmond
28-07-2006, 02:44 PM
It is an internationally acceptable practice
Where on Earth did you pull this dribble from?


for religious organisations to fund events and community activities as long as these events and activities are appolitical (e.g. not aimed at challenging law and order). If a church can hold a Bingo night, why not let them organize a chess tournament:hmm:
Pay attention Michael. No one is saying that they cannot organize a chess tournament.

Garvinator
28-07-2006, 03:18 PM
Pay attention Michael. No one is saying that they cannot organize a chess tournament.
I have noticed that alot of the ppl attempting to comment on this thread have been saying that they should be allowed to run chess tournaments, which COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT.

I dont know whether the posters are deliberately missing the point or cant find a real reason to debate the original premise for the thread.

EGOR
28-07-2006, 03:21 PM
I have noticed that alot of the ppl attempting to comment on this thread have been saying that they should be allowed to run chess tournaments, which COMPLETELY MISSES THE POINT.
What would you say is "THE POINT"?:)

Basil
28-07-2006, 03:27 PM
What would you say is "THE POINT"?:)

EGOR, you made THE POINT well with your previous. GG and Boris are highlighting that point.

EGOR
28-07-2006, 03:31 PM
EGOR, you made THE POINT well with your previous. GG and Boris are highlighting that point.
:) OK

Purple
28-07-2006, 07:03 PM
Just out of interest, are you in the habit of failing to apologise for accusations when they have been shown to be false?

Just out of interest, who are you?

If you can't show yourself to be a decent human being now, my willingness to explain myself to you is at an end.
Why should he apologise? Has he done anything wrong?

Desmond
28-07-2006, 07:08 PM
Why should he apologise? Has he done anything wrong?
I wouldn't dwell on it too much, Purple. He'll be back in another 8 months with new stones to throw. He won't need to pick this up again.

Basil
28-07-2006, 07:09 PM
Why should he apologise? Has he done anything wrong?
Hi Alex. Give it up.

Purple
28-07-2006, 07:13 PM
Hi Alex. Give it up.
You have funny face. You should give up now. Your mummy spanks you when you go home.

MichaelBaron
28-07-2006, 07:43 PM
You have funny face. You should give up now. Your mummy spanks you when you go home.


I guess its good when one's face reflects his intelligence :hmm:

Arrogant-One
23-08-2006, 01:39 PM
So you were quite happy to be a financial beneficiary of Outreach Chess, but unhappy when a short prayer was uttered at the start of the tournament?

Hypocrite.
Hi Goughfather.

I agree with you entirely! This is an issue that I think needs to be aired since Brian Thomas has now joined the CAQ Council.

I don't know if Outreach Chess is aware of his views or not, but they will certainly be made aware of them in due course if he continues to beat the same old drums.

Desmond
23-08-2006, 02:19 PM
Hi Goughfather.

I agree with you entirely!
I'm sure that if GF was seeking support, yours would be the last welcomed.

This is an issue that I think needs to be aired since Brian Thomas has now joined the CAQ Council.I'm not sure of the relevance, but please explplain your latest fascinating conspiracy theory. I can't wait.


I don't know if Outreach Chess is aware of his views or not, this is because you have an obvious lack of comprehension skills. Cat said he would make them aware of my concerns.

but they will certainly be made aware of them in due course if he continues to beat the same old drums.This is like threatening an ocean with a waterpistol.

Arrogant-One
23-08-2006, 04:45 PM
I'm sure that if GF was seeking support, yours would be the last welcomed.
I'm not sure of the relevance, but please explplain your latest fascinating conspiracy theory. I can't wait.

this is because you have an obvious lack of comprehension skills. Cat said he would make them aware of my concerns.
This is like threatening an ocean with a waterpistol.
Hello Pumpkin-Head. I see you've changed your Avator, but you'll always be a special Pumpkin-Head to me! :P