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 think you're trying to make the figures say what you want them to say.
Anyhow, I'm the President of the Inner Galactic Chess Federation and know little of these attempts to reform the political fortunes of an insignificant planet like Earth, the third rock from a yellow star. :)
Well, chesstalk viewers are mostly from all across the country. Mainly adults too, I think.
Do you mean you're the Prez of the INTER-Galactic Chess Federation :)?
If not, our scientists think there is a giant black hole at the centre of the galaxy.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Does ITP have a position on the upcoming CFC elections?
The Iced Tea Party is favourably disposed to improve culture in our great country (which can be greater). Chess certainly qualifies as a cultural matter.
However, the CFC is a registered charity. If elected, we would at some point be reviewing criteria used for selecting various boards of directors for randomly selected charities, and seeing if it would be necessary to require some minimum standards for individuals to be eligible to sit on such boards. The CFC would be one charity that may come under such scrutiny.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Do you mean you're the Prez of the INTER-Galactic Chess Federation :)?
If not, our scientists think there is a giant black hole at the centre of the galaxy.
We concern ourselves only with the stars and planets in the Inner portion of the Milky Way Galaxy. Hence INNER. :)
Does ITP have a position on the upcoming CFC elections?
The IGCF has no interest in affiliating with the CFC. We see the governing structure as being similar to the collective called "The Borg" which holds no appeal for us. :)
Will the ITP be running a slate or supporting individual candidates in the upcoming CFC elections?
The Iced Tea Party is more concerned with national or provincial politics than intervening in CFC elections. However we can observe that the position of CFC President might be well served by someone who has previous experience on the CFC Board of Directors, or who has served as Executive Director. A successful career in a field other than chess is also recommended.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Given below is a hypothetical platform for a fictional Iced Tea Party of Canada. Hypothetically, would you vote for the Iced Tea Party?
Platform for the Iced Tea Party of Canada:
Which, when you look at it, just "Motherhood and Apple Pie." Name anyone who could possibly be against any of that. The current parties are all in favour of all of it, just ask them!
when you look at [the Iced Tea Party Platform], [it's] just "Motherhood and Apple Pie." Name anyone who could possibly be against any of that. The current parties are all in favour of all of it, just ask them!
But, how do you plan to go about doing it?
Firstly, just look at the sample platforms of two 'real' political parties that I gave links to in earlier posts of this thread (the Canadian Action Party and U.S. Tea Party platforms). At best (the Canadian Action Party) their platform is a statement of values without much detail, and at worst (the Tea Party) they do not really have a platform at all, but rather harsh criticisms of their current gov't. No real platform, yet a popular (Tea) party!
Neither 'real ''party really goes too much into what they'd actually do, and perhaps rightly so, since they can announce more detailed policies after a party policy convention, or on the election trail. In addition, a platform ideally should be timeless, since a plan of action depends on the times and circumstances a party finds itself in when in power. I explained as much earlier to Roger.
Secondly, respondents to this poll didn't all vote in favour of the Iced Tea Party (nor all against), so they must surely see things in the platform that are not all Motherhood and Apple Pie to everyone (though at 4 votes for and 10 against at present, as I write these words, the Iced Tea Party could be in minority gov't territory if the poll is representative :): 4 ITP, 3 CON, 3 LIB, 2 NDP, 2 BQ would be a dream split).
As for naming anyone who would be against at least some of the things in the platform (mind you, what party wouldn't try to appeal to as many voters as possible, within their philosophy), let's refresh our memory first:
"Platform for the Iced Tea Party of Canada:
We have 5 goals to improve Canada for its citizens, as listed below in descending order of priority:
1. Improve the Economy (Reduce the Debt, Grow Jobs, Build Manufacturing Base and Research and Development in Canada);
2. Improve the Environment (Reduce or Combat Pollution);
3. Improve Society (Reduce Crime, Fight Addictions, Improve Education & Health Services where not Provincial matters involved, Tighten Immigration, Move away from Multi-Culturalism to Integration like American ideal, Give better tax incentives to have families);
4. Improve Culture (Give Incentives to have world class cities, artists, chefs, writers, poets, film-makers, playwrights, athletics, etc. in Canada when affordable);
5. Improve Canada's Stature Internationally (return to Peacekeeping role, except only if we/NATO are attacked, Host world summits and sports events, and contribute more foreign aid, when affordable)."
Important: Note that these 5 goals were stated to be in order of priority.
Because Canada's identity has in truth long been based on being seen as a great country to live in, having a good standard of living, and because a nation's well-being and influence depends first of all on its wealth, and the employment and standard of living of its citizens, the Iced Tea party doesn't hesitate to put improving the economy as its first goal. Though any pollution is regrettable, improving the environment must come as a close second priority on our list of goals for this nation. Thus I don't think we'd attract as many people who would vote for the Green Party as we might otherwise.
When it comes to how we'd improve society, that goal takes third place as a priority. Environmental concerns can affect citizens' health in the long or short term as much or more than any addiction might, for example. Not to mention our wildlife. So, we'd devote a bigger chunk of resources and manpower towards reducing or combating pollution than most other parties (except the Greens) would devote, instead of doing as much as we might for lower priorities on our list of 5 goals. Thus I don't think we'd attract so many people who would vote for the NDP, for example, since they apparently would place more value on trying to improve society (at least for their vision of a better society).
Now let's look at the ways we'd try to improve society. As listed in some detail in the platform, we'd try to deal with society's ills first (improving culture is a lower goal for us - that could lose us votes in Quebec, to the Bloc for instance). We'd reduce crime by all means at our disposal - improving education and job opportunities for youth, stiffer sentences for criminals, appointing tougher judges - so we'd probably lose some voters in prisons (or voters who might get there) to the Liberals, for example.
Cleaning up drug addicts and cracking down on dealers, and getting rid of crack pipe and syringe handout programs in favour of treatment centres would be on our agenda too - more lost Liberal, and NDP, voters. We'd transition out of Multi-culturalism (lots of lost voters to Liberals there, possibly), plus tighten immigration (lots of Liberal voters lost there) and give tax incentives to have families so that our traditional cultural makeup isn't gradually lost through declining birthrate (lots of lost Liberal voters there).
Because we promise to make improving our culture and our international stature our less than top priorities, and we promise to spend as affordable, e.g. not one billion dollars for security on a summit that needn't have been held in a major city like Toronto, we'd lose more Liberal votes (and Conservative ones), but we would appeal at least to disaffected Conservatives who feel their party has been overspending as badly as any Liberal gov't ever did - noting that the Conservative party is more or less the Reform Party in disguise, a party which harped on the gross overspending of both Trudeau and Mulroney in their day.
Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Wednesday, 30th June, 2010, 01:35 AM.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Well, nothing you have said leads me to believe that you're idea for a party would have any more chance at improving the country than any of the parties we already have.
For example, you apparently subscribe to the belief that "reducing the debt" would improve the economy. There is no evidence whatsoever that it would, and plenty of evidence that, even if were good in the long run, it would be disastrous to do it any time in the next few years.
Actually, the Canadian government does not have to issue debt to do anything it desires to do anyway, so the issuance of debt is a political decision, not an economic one. Note that this does not apply to provincial governments, but do you even understand why that is?
If you do not understand this simple fact, then I hold no hope that you even understand the economy at all, just like all the other political parties we have today, including the one I normally choose to vote for. You are really asking us to replace the current set of blind men who at least have a record that we can refer to, to a new blind man who has no such record at all. Why should we buy a pig in a poke?
Well, nothing you have said leads me to believe that you're idea for a party would have any more chance at improving the country than any of the parties we already have.
For example, you apparently subscribe to the belief that "reducing the debt" would improve the economy. There is no evidence whatsoever that it would, and plenty of evidence that, even if were good in the long run, it would be disastrous to do it any time in the next few years.
Actually, the Canadian government does not have to issue debt to do anything it desires to do anyway, so the issuance of debt is a political decision, not an economic one. Note that this does not apply to provincial governments, but do you even understand why that is?
If you do not understand this simple fact, then I hold no hope that you even understand the economy at all, just like all the other political parties we have today, including the one I normally choose to vote for. You are really asking us to replace the current set of blind men who at least have a record that we can refer to, to a new blind man who has no such record at all. Why should we buy a pig in a poke?
Running a deficit, of course, increases the debt (I grant you, the Feds could print more money, unlike provinces). Having a surplus does the opposite. We plan to get into a position to have a surplus as soon as possible, and keep deficits to a minimum, if we do happen to get into power during hard times like now.
We don't need economist eggheads to tell us about a matter of semantics concerning whether running up a huge debt over time is a political or economic decision. The Americans have such a huge debt they're headed towards bankruptcy. For their country it's clearly an economic matter at their federal level now. Do we as Canadians want to head down that road again? At least if a province goes bankrupt, the nation can offer assistance. If the country goes bankrupt, we're all SOL.
Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Wednesday, 30th June, 2010, 03:08 PM.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Running a deficit, of course, increases the debt (I grant you, the Feds could print more money, unlike provinces). Having a surplus does the opposite.
Both falsehoods.
We plan to get into a position to have a surplus as soon as possible, and keep deficits to a minimum, if we do happen to get into power during hard times like now.
So you are just another neoliberal, the folks who got us into all this trouble in the first place.
We don't need economist eggheads
Gosh, I haven't been called an egghead since the 1950's! Well, if you want to call names, I'll call you an ignorant know-nothing, which seems perfectly fair since you here proclaim your ignorance as a source of pride.
At least if a province goes bankrupt, the nation can offer assistance. If the country goes bankrupt, we're all SOL.
But there is no amount of "debt" that can drive a sovereign country with a sovereign currency into bankruptcy. Indeed, have you noticed that, for example, there are no international bankruptcy courts? We can default on our debts if we desire to, but there is never any necessity to do so.
Now let me ask you a question: what percentage of our so-called "national debt" is held by Canadians, in Canada?
This is not a matter of semantics, but a matter of simple observable fact.
Next you'll be calling for a return to the gold standard so we can really live the 1930's all over again.
Tweet
Comment