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.
Ouch! It couldn't have been worst. It's an historic day for Canada indeed, the day where Canadians proved how they only care about money.... At least I am proud to see that people were not blind here, in Quebec. It's kind of weird when we think to it, the harper government is elected, but I can't name only one person I know in Quebec who voted for him!
Anyway, such a government will definitely help sovereignty.
-If we kill the environment, it was meant to die.
Harper
I did not follow the campaign very closely and I was quite shocked.
This was a historical election - the collapse of the Bloc, worst ever showing by the Liberals, best ever by the NDP and the first Green electoral success.
Now what? Will the Harper Government rename Canada the Harper Republic?
Ouch! It couldn't have been worst. It's an historic day for Canada indeed, the day where Canadians proved how they only care about money.... At least I am proud to see that people were not blind here, in Quebec. It's kind of weird when we think to it, the harper government is elected, but I can't name only one person I know in Quebec who voted for him!
Anyway, such a government will definitely help sovereignty.
That is a very odd perspective. The Bloc has been relegated to losing its official party status and you spin that as helping sovereignty? I think that the real lesson here is that sovereignty doesn't have much traction at the moment. I don't think that anyone wants to open that can of worms right now.
I don't recall anything major in the election about the dollar specifically, and if that was in fact the case, then only people who really understand how the currency works would have any idea which party would lead to higher/lower dollars.
- The NDP isn't our government. Thanks but I prefer my money doesn't go to the incompetent and the lazy.
- We have a Conservative government. It will almost assuredly lead to a stronger dollar. That allows people with dollars to buy more with them. I certainly prefer my dollars allow me to buy more.
- That we got a Green Party candidate. Not so much because I am a big fan of their party (I voted for them in this election only because the other parties in my riding were even worse ;-)) but because they deserve a chance to be in the debates and sink or swim there.
I am unhappy that:
- We have a Conservative majority. Harper is going to stay the course. When we're done we will have "brought Democracy" to most of the Middle East. Personally, I don't think that is worth sacrificing one Canadian life, let alone hundreds or thousands.
- That we are becoming a more polarized electorate. I think it is likely that over time the rich are going to become richer and after housing here implodes the middle class will be broke, like many are in the US. This is going to polarize the electorate even more. It's no longer a French/English thing. It's a have/have not thing.
"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.
Regarding Larry's contest: the central issue of an election is who wins, and do they get a majority. So I think that the contest should have had the number 154 (i.e., half of the 308 seats available) hard-coded into it somewhere. The central result of the election is the Conservative majority. Everything else is, dare I say it?, window dressing. Written as an objective non-contestant. Smile.
Regional and pop votes results at sfu, including 2008 comparisons, in case anybody's still counting.
The top part of the thread was very Canadian and polite, but I find it funny that the first person to weigh in on analysis found me in disagreement with every point he made. LOL.
One irony of the election: we all remember the attack ads planted by the Conservatives for months before the campaign began. They attacked Ignatieff for being too USA-American. Well, that worked. The irony is that the legislation unleashed/promised by the new majority government will serve to turn Canada into a country more like the United States. Don't get me wrong, I like people, just don't necessarily like the situations they make for themselves / find themselves in.
Another irony: Vancouver Islanders and Gulf Islanders elected North America's first Green representative despite the fact that the election campaign corresponded with the left coast's coldest and wettest Spring in many a year. A neighbour said something about La Niña. Well, it isn't really an irony because the Green Party isn't "about" Global Warming. But it is hopeful in that Canadians are capable of understanding science better than goose bumps. Nationwide, the Green Party lost 40% of its support but went from zero seats to 1. Why? Organization. Elizabeth May in her acceptance speech thanked (en masse) some 2,000 volunteers, which is more than the Greens had voters in many a riding. It wouldn't surprise me if many of those volunteers were not year-round residents of the riding. I guess that the strategy forced upon her was to win the Leader's Debate (again, in 2015 as in 2008) (unless they change the rules) to regain the support, and move along. As the NDP will remember, it is often a tortuous path. The Bloc lost a similar portion of voting support, and by the light of being a national force, was wiped out. Flash-card word: strategic.
Looking at the pop votes, the main places that the NDP / Liberals could have turned the blue tide (of derrieres) by cooperation were Ontario, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. I haven't looked at it on a riding by riding basis, but I suspect that the NDP / Liberals could have won the election with their almost 50% total of the vote. Such an alliance would be condemned as cynical, and it would have to be impermanent (after all, if the Conservatives were to elect another "Red Tory" leader, many Liberals would rather go in that direction). But unless the Conservatives self-destruct by giving full vent to their fear wing, it strikes me as the only way out of the desert for "progressive" movements. An old but still invisible 800-pound gorilla in the room.
I don't think the NDP should be smug. They lost, which is all that counts in this system. And remember the Créditistes. Remember them because you can't find them. That's what happened the last time a non-traditional national party took root in Québec. It is still a hard row to hoe.
Final rant: maybe I never would have voted for them anyway, but I found Paul Martin, Stephane Dion, and Michael Ignatieff to be no worse than their more successful predecessors. It strikes me that the Liberals are paying for that payoff scandal. Final rant, final irony.
Last edited by Jonathan Berry; Tuesday, 3rd May, 2011, 01:16 PM.
I think the Cons were headed for a minority up until a couple days ago when Harper told "blue" liberals to vote strategically against the ndp. And some people listened to the anti-ndp ads and got scared.
There was a lot of confusion on the left, riding by riding, about who should get the so called "Anything But Conservative" vote. Even major ABC websites like Catch22, ProjectDemocracy, Pair Vote were slow to react to the surge. Not to mention the uninformed voters, those in denial, and the fact that the media kept saying the ndp surge may not translate into seats.
I really do hope the rise of the ndp, the fall of the bloc, and the voice of Elizabeth May will finally bring electoral reform onto the table (I know it's probably meaningless with a majority conservative government). The popular vote for the Conservatives went up only 1.9% from 2008, yet they won 24 more seats, and a lot more power. Only 39.6% of voters wanted a Conservative government, and yet that gives them a majority?? Why are regional differences the most important factor in who forms government? #fail
Heartbroken; no such thing for me. Invigorated...Yes...Doubling my efforts on studying climate change...yes...pointing out the idiocy of climate change denial...yes...
Vlad, you are wrong on climate change; and have no credentials to have a meaningful view on it. Climate change is occurring, and we will all pay the piper for it; sooner than later. You have no idea what you are talking about regarding climate change. Gloat all you want...
Remember that only 24% of Canadians voted for Conservatives...(40% x 60%)...
I agree with Felix. The people of Quebec voted for the NDP en masse to stop Harper from getting a majority. They did their part but Ontario did not. Just as quickly, they would switch en masse back to a party like the Bloc...
Tom, do you think that this was really democracy last night? What were the main issues of the election? Ever since Ignatieff became leader of the Liberals the Harper Cons have attacked him from all angles, spending literally millions to do it. What was Harpers message during the campaign. Canadians were not even allowed to attend his rallies if they had any connections to the other parties. Is that democracy; no it is illusion...Were the G20 protesters in Toronto in the summer that were arrested en masse and then all released with no charges operating under a democracy?
Tom, do you think that this was really democracy last night? What were the main issues of the election? Ever since Ignatieff became leader of the Liberals the Harper Cons have attacked him from all angles, spending literally millions to do it. What was Harpers message during the campaign. Canadians were not even allowed to attend his rallies if they had any connections to the other parties. Is that democracy; no it is illusion...Were the G20 protesters in Toronto in the summer that were arrested en masse and then all released with no charges operating under a democracy?
Many people don't bother to vote. Many who do vote don't really think about their vote before they cast it. I am sure that some people were swayed by Jack Layton in the massage parlour or that Ignatieff likes the US or that Harper is Bushama's lapdog, but what can you do? People vote for all sorts of crazy reasons, but probably some people would think your reason or my reason for voting the way we did is just as crazy. Maybe they would be right. ;-)
Basically all these clowns are professional politicians. So if you vote Right you are going to get a government that wants to wage war, snoop around your bedroom and put cameras on every street corner "for your security". Meanwhile, if you vote Left you get a bunch of nannystaters who want to rob the money from the productive and competent and give it to the unproductive and incompetent since no one is ever personally responsible for their own situation and it's always the fault of corporations/rich people/the military-industrial complex.
Personally, I would vote for the guy or gal who stands up and says "government isn't the solution just work it out yourselves" AND actually starts cutting government. No more foreign wars over terror, no more robbing citizens to finance grand visions. Not likely, since if people got used to less government a whole basket of these professional politicians would be out of jobs. ;-)
"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 think the Cons were headed for a minority up until a couple days ago when Harper told "blue" liberals to vote strategically against the ndp. And some people listened to the anti-ndp ads and got scared.
There was a lot of confusion on the left, riding by riding, about who should get the so called "Anything But Conservative" vote.
There is little evidence that ABC was a factor anywhere beyond Quebec.
Even major ABC websites like Catch22, ProjectDemocracy, Pair Vote were slow to react to the surge. Not to mention the uninformed voters, those in denial, and the fact that the media kept saying the ndp surge may not translate into seats.
I really do hope the rise of the ndp, the fall of the bloc, and the voice of Elizabeth May will finally bring electoral reform onto the table (I know it's probably meaningless with a majority conservative government). The popular vote for the Conservatives went up only 1.9% from 2008, yet they won 24 more seats, and a lot more power. Only 39.6% of voters wanted a Conservative government, and yet that gives them a majority?? Why are regional differences the most important factor in who forms government? #fail
Nobody was whining when the Liberals won a healthy majority with 37% of the vote under Chretian. Electoral reform is a non-starter when the desired result is a permanent minority government with all the instability that entails.
The dynamics of population growth in Canada means that there will be 30 new ridings next time mostly in areas of Conservative strength (Ontario and the West).
Elizabeth May can be congratulated for beating a cabinet minister by a significant margin. It is an accomplishment that I didn't believe she was capable of but I concede that I was wrong. The reality is that the Greens took a step back in this campaign as they will have much less money to work with because of their poor result in the popular vote and even that subsidy may be doomed in three years (according to the Conservative campaign promise). May will not be effective if her parliamentary style is similar to her debating style in 2008. An independent MP without official party status does not get much in the way of resources or opportunities to present her case unless she can find a way to work with the government which she has shown some disdain for.
Tweet
Comment