If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
There are many more Democrats than Republicans coming up for re-election in the Senate. I don't see the Democratic party in its current form while doubling down on the policies that caused them to lose in 2016 will offer the majority of people what they want. Right now it looks like Pocahontas Elizabeth Warren is the front runner.
Speaking of liberals telling tall tales what do you make of our Defense Minister's speech taking credit for the planning and execution of a military offensive? Why? What was the upside?
...
Yes, you're right. I didn't realize the actual Senate breakdown for the mid-terms until I just looked it up a minute ago. The Dems now have 46 senators with 23 of them up for re-election in 2018. Only 8 Reps and 2 independents are also up for re-election. So even if the Dems win all of their re-election bids plus take all of the Rep and indie bids, they'll still be 11 votes short of the 2/3 required in the Senate to convict a President and turf him/her out of office. However, the Senate convicts and turfs. It's actually the House, as you know doubt know, that impeaches and only a simple majority is needed there. In 2018, the Dems would need to hang on to the 193 seats they've got and pick up an additional 25 to have a shot at impeachment. Possible? Probably still a long shot, and that's assuming they could make an effective case for impeachment. Who knows, Trump may yet get his act in order.
Re Sajjan, I was shocked. And you're right, there was absolutely zero upside for taking such a huge risk with his career. In the face of such an illogical and self-harming act, one has to wonder if he is suffering from a mental health issue that has impaired his judgement. Personally, I think he has permanently damaged his credibility and should resign. A tragic situation.
Last edited by Peter McKillop; Tuesday, 2nd May, 2017, 04:05 PM.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Mr.Belzberg pointed out Ben's rating is lower than mine, so by Ben's own standards, I should be calling him a moron. ...
Mavros, I'm sorry but I really do not wish to get into all of this with you. I said earlier in this sub-thread that I found most of your comments disturbing. That continues to be the case. More importantly, I think Ben is doing a far better job defending himself than I could do. Ben's style may not be to your liking but I agree with virtually everything he's said here.
There is one amusing little thing I'd like to point out. In an earlier post in this sub-thread, Ben referred to 'raNtings'. Sid misread that as 'ratings' and now you're continuing that error. Kind of funny, really. :)
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Yes, you're right. I didn't realize the actual Senate breakdown for the mid-terms until I just looked it up a minute ago. The Dems now have 46 senators with 23 of them up for re-election in 2018. Only 8 Reps and 2 independents are also up for re-election. So even if the Dems win all of their re-election bids plus take all of the Rep and indie bids, they'll still be 11 votes short of the 2/3 required in the Senate to convict a President and turf him/her out of office. However, the Senate convicts and turfs. It's actually the House, as you know doubt know, that impeaches and only a simple majority is needed there. In 2018, the Dems would need to hang on to the 193 seats they've got and pick up an additional 25 to have a shot at impeachment. Possible? Probably still a long shot, and that's assuming they could make an effective case for impeachment. Who knows, Trump may yet get his act in order.
He has been doing many of the right things to keep his base happy. Barring some catastrophe I would expect the Republicans to come close to the 60 votes since about 8 of the Democrats hail from states where Trump won convincingly.
Bill Clinton was impeached and lost his law license but otherwise was unaffected and promptly made piles of money as an ex-Prez.
Re Sajjan, I was shocked. And you're right, there was absolutely zero upside for taking such a huge risk with his career. In the face of such an illogical and self-harming act, one has to wonder if he is suffering from a mental health issue that has impaired his judgement. Personally, I think he has permanently damaged his credibility and should resign. A tragic situation.
Jet lag and a lack of sleep might be one possible explanation. A temporary unleashing of his personality disorder would be another explanation. He seemed like he would make a good minister. He should probably study Trump if he wants to get past this without resigning.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Tuesday, 2nd May, 2017, 04:56 PM.
Mavros, I'm sorry but I really do not wish to get into all of this with you. I said earlier in this sub-thread that I found most of your comments disturbing. That continues to be the case. More importantly, I think Ben is doing a far better job defending himself than I could do. Ben's style may not be to your liking but I agree with virtually everything he's said here.
There is one amusing little thing I'd like to point out. In an earlier post in this sub-thread, Ben referred to 'raNtings'. Sid misread that as 'ratings' and now you're continuing that error. Kind of funny, really. :)
Thanks Peter. I'd rather hear an evaluation from somebody who isn't as blatantly biased as you are. All the best to you.
Thanks Vlad. Your argument above was great addressing Ben the troll. It was well thought out and funny too. I've stopped reading his posts. Ben and Paul couldn't argue their way out of a paper bag.
Last edited by Mavros Whissell; Tuesday, 2nd May, 2017, 06:38 PM.
That might be true if chess ability correlated perfectly with intelligence. You know what correlates a whole lot better? IQ... because, you know, that's what it's designed to measure.
How about this: you and I will write the same Mensa-certified IQ test. If you score higher than me, I will publicly admit that I'm a moron and send you a check for $1000. If I score higher than you, you will never fucking post in this thread again. Deal? I'm absolutely serious.
Hey Ben if you consider me as dumb as Mavros or any other conservative I will take you up on your $1000.00 challenge. First try taking this short 20 question online IQ test and tell us what your score is. My result was 190 indicated by the screen shot I took of the test result below. Here is the link https://www.arealme.com/iq/en/ The questions start really easy and get progressively more difficult. Only one or two seemed really hard. I don't think these tests prove anything but lets see how we stack up. I have never tried an IQ test except in elementary school so it is a first for me. I also tried the half hour online mensa 30 question workout IQ test and scored 100 percent.http://www.mensa.org/workout/feedback So I feel very comfortable about doing a real accredited test if you really want to waste $1000.00
[IMG][/IMG]
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Wednesday, 3rd May, 2017, 09:23 AM.
Thanks Vlad. Your argument above was great addressing Ben the troll. It was well thought out and funny too. I've stopped reading his posts. Ben and Paul couldn't argue their way out of a paper bag.
Wasting time on them just diminishes anyone who bothers. The one thing we can't get more of is time. No one on their death bed will say, "I should have read more of Paul Bonham's or Ben Daswani's posts on Chesstalk." The few snippets that I see quoted in other people's posts do not fill me with nostalgia but simply act as reinforcement for the original decision to deep six their posts.
...
Bill Clinton was impeached and lost his law license but otherwise was unaffected and promptly made piles of money as an ex-Prez. ...
Yes, Bill Clinton. Yet another man done in by lust. Or, as you've pointed out, only partially done in by lust. He spoke in Hamilton many years ago. A fundraiser of some sort, I think. Notwithstanding that it was a fundraiser, I seem to recall reading that his fee was low six figures - don't recall the exact amount. So long as they're male and their offenses don't put them in prison for a long time, a lot of bad actors seem to land on their feet. Is it right? Probably a question with no definitive answer.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
I've noticed a trend over the past few years of conservatives calling people trolls whenever they disagree on a topic, and then proceed to disregard everything they say on the basis of this claim. This is why Justin Trudeau won; because of people like you.
I've noticed a trend over the past few years of conservatives calling people trolls whenever they disagree on a topic, and then proceed to disregard everything they say on the basis of this claim. This is why Justin Trudeau won; because of people like you.
I admire your writing style and your powerful grip on reality.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Yes, Bill Clinton. Yet another man done in by lust. Or, as you've pointed out, only partially done in by lust. He spoke in Hamilton many years ago. A fundraiser of some sort, I think. Notwithstanding that it was a fundraiser, I seem to recall reading that his fee was low six figures - don't recall the exact amount. So long as they're male and their offenses don't put them in prison for a long time, a lot of bad actors seem to land on their feet. Is it right? Probably a question with no definitive answer.
Bill Clinton's crime which got him impeached and cost him his law license was not having sexual relations with an intern, it was lying about it under oath.
I've noticed a trend over the past few years of conservatives calling people trolls whenever they disagree on a topic, and then proceed to disregard everything they say on the basis of this claim. This is why Justin Trudeau won; because of people like you.
I've noticed a trend over the past few years when the trolls got in over their heads they sent for outside reinforcements or created virtual ones by creating sock puppets.
Hi Lucas, I think I might have played your brother... Noam? Maybe no relation. Can't remember his name exactly. Kapuskasing 2003. Very polite, cordial young fellow - well spoken too. The reason I do not read Ben's posts any longer is because they are loaded with angry insults and not real arguments. That's it. There's not even a coherent, substantiated argument coming out from him.
Comment