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.
As expected Nigel is now FIDE VIce President. This is a great outcome and going forward the days of a corrupt FIDE regime are over and holding tournaments in venues that ban playesrs on the basis of ethnicity is also over. Furthermore if Arkady gets in trouble FIDE will have a good future going forward with NIgel Short as a fall back. I have every confidence that FIDE will get its bank accounts restored that was highly problematic with Makro where this was not forthcoming even with Kirsan gone.
As expected Nigel is now FIDE VIce President. This is a great outcome and going forward the days of a corrupt FIDE regime are over and holding tournaments in venues that ban playesrs on the basis of ethnicity is also over. Furthermore if Arkady gets in trouble FIDE will have a good future going forward with NIgel Short as a fall back. I have every confidence that FIDE will get its bank accounts restored that was highly problematic with Makro where this was not forthcoming even with Kirsan gone.
Nigel is perhaps a vice president. That means there are three vice presidents. I suspect that one of the elected vice presidents would step into the position in the event that Mr. Dvorkovich was not able to complete his duties.
Mr Arkady Dvorkovich is elected new President of FIDE at the General Assembly in Batumi, Georgia.
Members of the Presidential Ticket of Arkady Dvorkovich are elected into office:
Bachar Kouatly – Deputy President
Sewa Enyonam Fumey – General Secretary
Mahir Mammedov – Vice President
Julio Granda Zuniga – Vice President
Zhu Chen – Treasurer
The deputy President is Bachar Koualty is a well respected French Grandmaster and chess editor. In the eventuality that Arkady can't fulfill his duties I am comfortable that a Bachar will be completely acceptable to financial institutions especially, with the added anti corruption corporate governance function that Nigel's appointment brings to the Presidential board together with Short's former deputy Lukasz Turlej also appointed to the Presidential board .
The outcome for FIDE is as good as could be expected and much better then the awful status quo that has been around since 2014. Nigel's coalition with Arkady was a master stroke and it also was critical for Arkady in ensuring that Makro and his horribly corrupt regime was finally ended. (No thanks to the CFC!)
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Thursday, 4th October, 2018, 04:17 PM.
This looks very promising. I have a lot of respect for Bachar Koualty, whom I first met in Chicago in 1983 when he was playing for France in World Youth Championship.
Let's hope for the best.
lol. yeah right. Kavanaugh and Short both just got the nod. Women haters must be rejoicing. All hail the ugly misogynists!
And so says the resident fascist pig who adores murderous ex dictators like Kirsan and parrots meaningless rhetoric that presumes guilt until proven innocent.Join the shrieks of young left protesters in DC supporting an unsubstantiated Dem smear campaign, Sounds like the place for you Nigel. Short
survived a similar smear campaign and carried out his prinicipal aim of getting cleanhands4fide in a position to influence FIDE via the Presidential board.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Friday, 5th October, 2018, 11:39 PM.
Ah, you mean the Drumpf standard (lock her up, lock her up!!) of jurisprudence? Of course Kavanaugh wasn't on trial, he was applying for a job but that's irrelevant to you I guess. But since Der Trumpfer has spoken and GUPI us no longer in force according to him, then of "K" I say "lock him up, lock him up!!"
Oh, does it hurt when your own standard is applied to you and your friends? Poor baby...
Ah, you mean the Drumpf standard (lock her up, lock her up!!) of jurisprudence? Of course Kavanaugh wasn't on trial, he was applying for a job but that's irrelevant to you I guess. But since Der Trumpfer has spoken and GUPI us no longer in force according to him, then of "K" I say "lock him up, lock him up!!"
Oh, does it hurt when your own standard is applied to you and your friends? Poor baby...
Ed, this is one of the very few posts I have seen from you where I totally disagree. The corroborating evidence supporting Hillary's crimes is massive and has been for many years. The only reason she is not locked up was thanks to the good graces of James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Peter Sztrock, Andrew Mcabe et al who gave her a free pass. The evidence of this coverup has been recently declassified and pending the Inspector general's final ok will be released soon enough. The people chanting "lock her up" fully expected a fair trial where the evidence would be weighed.
K's alleged crimes on the other hand has ZERO corroborating evidence. An allegation that is completely uncorroborated is not grounds to deny someone a job or to publicly smear them, especially against the wishes of the accuser. Senator Susan Collins brillaintly articulated the issues.
Ed this is one of the very few posts I have seen from you where I totally disagree.
Well that should tell *you* something, but I doubt it will.
BS not reproduced...but even if it were true (and it isn't) it's utterly beside the point since it is an observable fact that the lady in question has never been charged with anything and under the system as it was before Der Pfuerer at least, you can't be locked up until you are charged and convicted. The standard "beyond reasonable doubt" only applies to conviction by trial, not to a job interview...
If Der Trumpf really wanted Ms. H. to be locked up he'd have put her on trial. Didn't happen. Ain't gonna happen. Give your head a shake!
Well that should tell *you* something, but I doubt it will.
BS not reproduced...but even if it were true (and it isn't) it's utterly beside the point since it is an observable fact that the lady in question has never been charged with anything and under the system as it was before Der Pfuerer at least, you can't be locked up until you are charged and convicted. The standard "beyond reasonable doubt" only applies to conviction by trial, not to a job interview...
If Der Trumpf really wanted Ms. H. to be locked up he'd have put her on trial. Didn't happen. Ain't gonna happen. Give your head a shake!
Clearly you have not read my post properly or bothered to see the video. The "beyond reasonable doubt" standard is not being applied in Judge K's confirmation process as is explained in some detail in the video. By your logic someone simply has to make an accusation that is completely unsubstantiated that then disqualifies them for a job. I am very happy to see that at least this is not the case when it comes to jobs in the US federal Government. It simply does not work that way.
As for Hillary you are just wrong, as explained above when the evidence of the cover up is released publicly I think it is very probable that she will be held to account for her crimes in a court of law. Even President Trump does not have the power under the American system to unilaterally decide to put someone on trial. When all the ducks are in a row a grand jury will be convened and they will decide if the evidence warrants indicting her and putting her on trial.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Saturday, 6th October, 2018, 03:31 PM.
Clearly you have not read my post properly or bothered to see the video. The "beyond reasonable doubt" standard is not being applied in Judge K's confirmation process as is explained in some detail in the video. By your logic someone simply has to make an accusation that is completely unsubstantiated that then disqualifies them for a job. I am very happy to see that at least this is not the case when it comes to jobs in the US federal Government. It simply does not work that way.
As for Hillary you are just wrong, as explained above when the evidence of the cover up is released publicly I think it is very probable that she will be held to account for her crimes in a court of law. Even President Trump does not have the power under the American system to unilaterally decide to put someone on trial. When all the ducks are in a row a grand jury will be convened and they will decide if the evidence warrants indicting her and putting her on trial.
I see that Maine Senator Susan Collins decided that she believes that Dr. Ford was sexually assaulted, but that it was not Kavanaugh who did it. Who is she to make this determination? Completely innappropriate and she will be turfed for sticking a knife in the heart of a true victim. It is not even correct to be setting a "more likely than not likely" bar. The bar for maintaining true sanctity (look up that word) in the Supreme Court needs to be 'is there any likelihood at all?" If the answer is yes, the candidate should be disqualified. And in Kavanaugh's case, because (1) Dr. Ford brought up her allegations years ago AND passed a polygraph test, and (2) there is evidence that Kavanaugh was a blackout drunk in both high school and college, he should by the "any likelihood at all" standard be disqualified. And that's not even including his partisan rant in front of the committee, which all by itself is disqualifying even according to former (Conservative!) SC Justice Stevens.
Also, in making her decision, Collins declared that the FBI investigation "appeared to be thorough". That is an outright lie. In fact, if Kavanaugh eventually gets impeached, it will be because the FBI will be forced to uncover the limits placed on their investigation by Trump, limits that Collins chose to ignore. Witnesses to Kavanaugh's blackout drunk behavior were NOT ALLOWED to be included in the FBI investigation.
In an ideal world, Kavanaugh would drop dead of a heart attack this afternoon and that would end his lifetime appointment. But even that isn't ideal, because the corrupt Republican senators are still not punished. For that, we need to look ahead to the midterms and the 2020 election.
Their decades of misogny was even confirmed further by Senator's Grassley's public statement that they can't find women for the Judiciary Committee because it's too much work! I wonder if Nigel Short would say the same about female chess players???
There's no doubt in my mind that Mitch McConnell et al made a deliberate tradeoff of executive power versus Conservative domination of the SCOTUS. They might even think they can get away without that trade, because there are FOX News polls showing a "resurgence" of Republican enthusiasm for the midterms. We'll just have to wait and see, but I"m pretty certain where it will go. I am reminded of the Mulroney era when he decided to simply ignore the electorate and make purely elitist decisions. His party was reduced to just 2 seats in the subsequent election, which he was at least smart enough to not be the party leader for that debacle.
I do believe Republicans have sentenced themselves to the political hinterland for at least a decade to come. Even if both bases are fired up, the Repugs are significantly outnumbered.
Also, on a slightly related note, I am seeing that my predictions from 2 years ago about Trump's "America First" agenda are coming true.... a return to a high inflation world. Amazon's decision to give all their employees a $15 per hour minimum wage is only going to accelerate the trend, and wise stock investors are seeing the trend now. We still haven't reached the knee of that curve.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
The bar for maintaining true sanctity (look up that word) in the Supreme Court needs to be 'is there any likelihood at all?"
I am very glad that is not the bar. That would be a very dystopian world where the elected minority could simply have any one in the world throw out any accusation (perhaps for reasons other then the nominees merits) and have them disqualified. As for Ford mentioning this years ago no evidence was provided to the committee that supports this including her therapists records and only was Justice K singled out by name by Ford as the culprit recently (only her husband claims he heard the name K from her in the past but this is not a reliable witness for obvious reasons). The FBI did what they were instructed to do by the Senate that was then authorized by Trump. Trump had no input into what the FBI would investigate.
The FBI was not told by the Senate to investigate Justice K's teenage drinking habits and accordingly did not. Ford herself is apparently very knowledgeable of how to defeat Polygraph tests and at least one person (ex boyfriend who in 8 years in being with her heard nothing from Ford about the alleged assault) claims she coached a friend of hers who was applying for a job with the FBI on how to defeat a Polygraph test in the 1990s' Not withstanding this none of the corroborators offered by Ford supported her claim including her own life long friend.
I agree that Judge K should not have gone on a partisan rant and he in fact says that himself. He was forgiven for losing his temper by the majority that supported him including some women republicans as well as at least one democratic senator given that he was outraged at the outlandish allegations that harmed him, his family and even the accuser that wished to remain anonymous.
As for using a wage policy of Amazon's as a barometer of inflation or how well the American economy is performing proves nothing other then your own ignorance of economics and how America is doing economically.
.
Last edited by Sid Belzberg; Saturday, 6th October, 2018, 06:53 PM.
I am very glad that is not the bar. That would be a very dystopian world where the elected minority could simply have any one in the world throw out any accusation (perhaps for reasons other then the nominees merits) and have them disqualified. As for Ford mentioning this years ago no evidence was provided to the committee that supports this including her therapists records and only was Justice K singled out by name by Ford as the culprit recently (only her husband claims he heard the name K from her in the past but this is not a reliable witness for obvious reasons). The FBI did what they were instructed to do by the Senate that was then authorized by Trump. Trump had no input into what the FBI would investigate.
The FBI was not told by the Senate to investigate Justice K's teenage drinking habits and accordingly did not. Ford herself is apparently very knowledgeable of how to defeat Polygraph tests and at least one person (ex boyfriend who in 8 years in being with her heard nothing from Ford about the alleged assault) claims she coached a friend of hers who was applying for a job with the FBI on how to defeat a Polygraph test in the 1990s' Not withstanding this none of the corroborators offered by Ford supported her claim including her own life long friend.
I agree that Judge K should not have gone on a partisan rant and he in fact says that himself. He was forgiven for losing his temper by the majority that supported him including some women republicans as well as at least one democratic senator given that he was outraged at the outlandish allegations that harmed him, his family and even the accuser that wished to remain anonymous.
As for using wage a policy of Amazon's as a barometer of inflation or how well the American economy is performing proves nothing other then your own ignorance of economics and how America is doing economically.
.
In addition, Ford has written a paper on recovered memories in which she states that all hypnosis is self-hypnosis. Someone who is aware of hypnosis could conceivably hypnotize themselves to beat a polygraph. There were many inconsistencies in her testimony and there is indication that an ex-FBI agent friend also attempted to suborn perjured testimony from Ford's friend who asserted that she had never met Kavanaugh nor attended any party in which he was present. It is not surprising that demonic forces are gathering to attack a good man. I think a Democratic ticket for 2020 of Avenati and Revnick is the next logical step in the collapse of the Democrat party assuming Revnick escapes prison for her perjured testimony.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Monday, 8th October, 2018, 10:28 AM.
By your logic someone simply has to make an accusation that is completely unsubstantiated that then disqualifies them for a job.
Not my logic, Der Drumpher's logic which says that people may be locked up without a trial. The accusations were not unsubstantiated and were credible, but even if they were not K's rage infested diatribe alone makes him unsuitable for the Supreme Court.
As for Hillary you are just wrong, as explained above when the evidence of the cover up is released publicly
Nope you are just wrong yourself. You have no evidence of criminality that would stand up by the Constitutional standard which Der Drumph, lover of Kim of Korea, wants to destroy. And I don't see youtube videos by nutcases as evidence, sorry.
Tweet
Comment