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.
I haven't been paying attention at all to the whole conversation, but if you want to ignore someone, there's actually a feature in vB that will do that for you, and just not show his posts at all.
Please tell us how to do that. There are others I also want to ignore!
I like you but I don't find the way you're giving Jean a hard time very pleasant. You appear to be trying to CENSURE someone you don't like (or whose view you don't like).
I like you too (in a weird sort of way), but when and only when you can patch things up with Ed Seedhouse, you will be qualified to lecture others about being pleasant.
Please look at my most recent response to Jean Hebert,
It is his holier-than-thou views I don't like, not he himself.
Yes, censure Hebert's views is exactly what I have done (if anyone thinks this has the same meaning as "censor", please look up both words and understand the difference).
As far as I can tell, censuring is part of what this message board exists for.
Otherwise, every post would be being edited to remove subjective content, i.e. opinions. Only such things as announcements or tournament results or the like would appear here.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Paul, I have to agree with Peter, Kerry, and Steve. (haha, they sound like a rock band from the 60's):D
Let's keep it civil with a high signal to noise ratio! (nice analogy Steve):)
What does STFU mean? Oh....., never mind, maybe I don't want to know!
Just some advice Bob, for your own improvement: do some thinking BEFORE you agree or disagree with anyone. And then justify your decision instead of just stating it. I'll be glad to debate.
Check my response to Steve Douglas re: signal to noise.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Paul, your interactions with Jean might be considered stalking on some sites. I'm not sure why Larry hasn't put a stop to this.
Please explain to us all where the line is drawn between "stalking" and "counter-arguing someone's views whenever those views are posted", which seems to be encouraged on this board.
If you're going to claim it has anything to do with the frequency of my replies to Jean's posts (as opposed to the content of the replies), then I suppose anyone can just repeat their views a million times on this board and win any debate by brute force, declaring anyone who dares to reply to them consistently as a "stalker".
How 'bout them apples?
Addendum: in fairness to you, Ken, I just edited that post and removed one statement which I thought I HAD removed before posting it. It was a statment that I admit is probably inflammatory. I usually catch those when I review what I've written before posting. But I doubt that that statement was what you were referring to as stalking.
Last edited by Paul Bonham; Wednesday, 26th May, 2010, 01:23 PM.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Kerry's not closed-minded. All he did was express his personal opinion about your posts. And you responded with "STFU?" Is that how people should respond to you if their opinions differ from yours?
Kerry is most certainly close minded.
The STFU is because at least 4 times now, he has interjected into a thread, responding to one of my posts that my dispute with Hebert is tiresome or some other such word. On those past occasions, I used logic to show him that Hebert is the one who is tiresome, because he is the one constantly slagging Canadian organizers, which prompts my responses. And I use logic to show that Hebert's arguments are false and silly. So far, Kerry hasn't debated MY LOGIC at all. That shows me that he is closed-minded, and is devoted to Hebert. I think his problem is that he sees that I am decimating Hebert in the debates (in Adam Cormier's words, Hebert was "eviscerated" by one of my posts). Kerry is upset at seeing Hebert so easily handled, and besides being closed-minded, he's a coward. He refuses to debate me on the points. He just uses the old "tiresome" argument.
There's a LOT of disputes on this board that are tiresome, you don't see Kerry interjecting those other disputes.
Now Kerry is taking the super easy way out, he's going to ignore my posts. And Mallon is helping this movement out, letting everyone know how to ignore the posts of others. I'm sure this ignoring goes on anyway, and I'm going to have to leave this board. I personally don't ignore anyone's posts, and for anyone to do so shows utter ignorance and closed-mindedness. Since everyone seems to want to ignore posts by those they don't agree with, I cannot see how this board can be a forum for debate. So I shall in the next few days leave you all to yourselves, which is what you all deserve.
Straw man? Neither Kerry nor Steve said you should be censored. And neither of them said they don't like you.
Kerry IN EFFECT is trying to censor me, by saying I shouldn't say anything about Hebert, because he, Kerry, thinks it's tiresome. To which Steve responded with approval. They totally ignore the tiresomeness of Hebert's anti-organizer posts.
Come on, Peter, you're smarter than that. It is censorship they are suggesting.
Do you think they might actually like me?
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
Hi Mark, I enjoyed this post, and your other post about organizers. You have a good attitude and viewpoint. I hope it won't become tainted by the likes of Jean Hebert.
I'm interested to know what is your field of study in university?
I'm also interested, since you are a young, promising player, in your views about the future of chess in general? Specifically, do you see chess960 or any other variant as something that should become more prominent in the future of chess? I know that Nakamura is the current WC of chess960, so he obviously supports it and plays it, although I don't know if he is in any way actively promoting it. Do you see yourself doing anything to actively promote chess960?
I'm interested too about your call for sponsorship. I know that in the poker world, promising new players who are talent-rich but cash-poor can be "bankrolled" by other players, using some kind of contractual agreement in which the investing player receives some amount back from the future winnings of the newer player. Is this going on in chess too, and is this the kind of sponsorship you are seeking? I may be interested if this is the case, and even more so if you are interested in actively promoting chess960.
In any event, good luck with your studies, with the Olympiad, and with your year of professional chess.
Nevermind all this, Mark (except my wishes of good luck). Jean has activated the Hebert Police and has instructed them to punish me with the "strictest criticism" because I've embarrassed him so badly.
I don't want to drag you into anything like this publicly. You could always private message me if you like, but I don't blame you if you just want to distance yourself from this dispute.
Nevertheless, I hope you carry your support for Canadian chess organizers into the future, and someday maybe you can undo whatever damage or negative vibes Hebert has created.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
I'm just wondering how any of this nonsense is related to the original post.
If you guys want to bicker, please take it somewhere else.
Well said. It's really frustrating to try to read what's important or interesting in between all the soap operas. I often times stop following threads because they end up going down the toilet.
... Now Kerry is taking the super easy way out, he's going to ignore my posts. And Mallon is helping this movement out, letting everyone know how to ignore the posts of others. I'm sure this ignoring goes on anyway, and I'm going to have to leave this board. I personally don't ignore anyone's posts, and for anyone to do so shows utter ignorance and closed-mindedness. Since everyone seems to want to ignore posts by those they don't agree with, I cannot see how this board can be a forum for debate. So I shall in the next few days leave you all to yourselves, which is what you all deserve. ...
The right to free speech includes the right to ignore, but not censor, the speech of others.
In the same way freedom of religion includes freedom from religion or the right to freely associate includes the right to not associate with others at all.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
I'm puzzled as to how you can say to the same person "STFU with your ranting. You don't like my posts, don't read them. I'll decide what's relevant in my posts, NOT YOU." and then say "Now Kerry is taking the super easy way out, he's going to ignore my posts." Isn't he doing exactly what you suggested?
I don't block anyone's posts, but there are people I rarely read and others I never will. Whenever I see a long back-and-forth between two people, I feel that any attempt at dialogue has long disappeared and that it now just a slagging contest. I don't usually pay them much mind.
When I see this pattern repeatedly, it simply reinforces this belief. If I can't get my message across in a couple of posts, I figure I am not doing it right. Further efforts don't strike me as worthwhile.
Another thing I don't get is the conviction with which you hold your positions and the right to express them, coupled with the equally firm stand that people who side with Jean Hébert are delusional or sycophantic. How can you insist on the right to your view while automatically criticizing those whose perspective is different?
To then state that you "have" to withdraw because people might block you seems to go against the principles you espouse. If you think you're right, don't worry about things like blocking. I wouldn't let it stop me.
Tweet
Comment