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.
Don't be so naive as to believe that this is not a problem in Canada as well.
In Canada politicians are required to put their investments into a blind trust. They are not directing their own investments. I haven't heard of this being an issue in Canada so as they say innocent until proven guilty.
In Canada politicians are required to put their investments into a blind trust. They are not directing their own investments. I haven't heard of this being an issue in Canada so as they say innocent until proven guilty.
man can you believe it, just too much, doesn't anyone have ethics anymore in America?
It certainly raises lots of interesting questions. For instance:
1. Could a sharp lawyer argue that, for example, Martha Stewart's trial & conviction were a denial of her constitutional right to due process? (i.e. the laws do not apply fairly to all citizens)
2. Zeljko, you asked, doesn't anyone have ethics anymore in America? Could it also be asked, has anything really changed in America (i.e. was there ever really a time when American legislators were, on the whole, highly ethical?), or is it a case of same-old, same-old but with more public awareness these days due to improved access to information?
Here's a reading recommendation:
What Is America?: A Short History of the New World Order
by Ronald Wright
"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
It certainly raises lots of interesting questions. For instance:
1. Could a sharp lawyer argue that, for example, Martha Stewart's trial & conviction were a denial of her constitutional right to due process? (i.e. the laws do not apply fairly to all citizens)
2. Zeljko, you asked, doesn't anyone have ethics anymore in America? Could it also be asked, has anything really changed in America (i.e. was there ever really a time when American legislators were, on the whole, highly ethical?), or is it a case of same-old, same-old but with more public awareness these days due to improved access to information?
Here's a reading recommendation:
What Is America?: A Short History of the New World Order
by Ronald Wright
In relative terms America is pretty corruption free; when you compare to the rampant & indemic corruption in China, Russia, Thailand, Mexico, much of eastern Europe and the Balkans under communist rule, various countries in Africa where people starve to death as a result, the US looks like the best of the bunch.
I suppose to your credit you are appaled at any level of corruption. However, if you understood the amount of corruption and violence elsewhere in the world you might start seeing the USA in a better light.
Martha Stewart's mistake was that she actually would have made money had she not tried to use insider trading. The drug that was not approved that caused her to dump the stock was actually approved later and the stock went up. I do believe you are invoking the old speeders excuse that if they can't pull everyone over who is speeding they don't have a right to pull over anyone. You're like the traffic cop pulling over the United States guy who is 5km/hr over the speed limit while other cars are going by at light speed.
Sharp lawyers can argue anything and everything under the sun.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 25th November, 2011, 12:51 AM.
Neither of those two cases involve insider trading of stock from information received in course of office. Wasn't Chretien cleared in the Shawinigate case? In any case Wikipedia is not a reliable source and in this case rather an incomplete summary.
Really? That's a credible source for information on Canada? With a big picture of Trotsky on the site?
Can you explain to me exactly why I should be listening to communists on some random, obscure website as a source of information about Canada? Why would you even link such a thing? Why would the person who added it to Wiki?
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 25th November, 2011, 12:42 AM.
Reason: communist link
In relative terms America is pretty corruption free; when you compare to the rampant & indemic corruption in China, Russia, Thailand, Mexico, much of eastern Europe and the Balkans under communist rule, various countries in Africa where people starve to death as a result, the US looks like the best of the bunch.
I suppose to your credit you are appaled at any level of corruption. However, if you understood the amount of corruption and violence elsewhere in the world you might start seeing the USA in a better light.
However, when you compare the US to modern western democracies, they don't stack up so well. If the citizens expect their politicians to be just a little bit better than the worst, then that is all they will get.
The american youth get fed this constant propaganda about how great their country is. The richest, most democratic, blah, blah, blah,....well now their eyes are being opened up, and they don't like what they see.
Kudos to the OWS youth who say this isn't good enough. Their elected representatives don't even understand what conflict of interest means.
However, when you compare the US to modern western democracies, they don't stack up so well. If the citizens expect their politicians to be just a little bit better than the worst, then that is all they will get.
The american youth get fed this constant propaganda about how great their country is. The richest, most democratic, blah, blah, blah,....well now their eyes are being opened up, and they don't like what they see.
Kudos to the OWS youth who say this isn't good enough. Their elected representatives don't even understand what conflict of interest means.
Is Mexico not a modern western democracy? If not what is it? Aren't all states modern in the sense that we are talking about how they are right now?
Don't get me wrong, America needs to be kept corruption free but only talking about America as if it was the entire focus of evil in the world is narrow sited. America by and large works and has saved the world in at least two world wars.
Kudos to the OWS youth for making it all about their 99% middle class privelege and not about the developing world where people are starving to death due to corruption. Americans are a pretty insular people to begin with and this just shows that even their youth have given up on any pretense of speaking out about the majority of the people on the planet. China alone is a major human rights violator but that all you get about China in the media today is how smugly they are holding onto American debt; but apparently we are okay with China's violations because they don't claim to be a democracy?
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Friday, 25th November, 2011, 10:15 AM.
In relative terms America is pretty corruption free; when you compare to the rampant & indemic corruption in China, Russia, Thailand, Mexico, much of eastern Europe and the Balkans under communist rule, various countries in Africa where people starve to death as a result, the US looks like the best of the bunch.
I suppose to your credit you are appaled at any level of corruption. However, if you understood the amount of corruption and violence elsewhere in the world you might start seeing the USA in a better light.
Martha Stewart's mistake was that she actually would have made money had she not tried to use insider trading. The drug that was not approved that caused her to dump the stock was actually approved later and the stock went up. I do believe you are invoking the old speeders excuse that if they can't pull everyone over who is speeding they don't have a right to pull over anyone. You're like the traffic cop pulling over the United States guy who is 5km/hr over the speed limit while other cars are going by at light speed.
Sharp lawyers can argue anything and everything under the sun.
For most of the last century and to date in this century, the US has touted itself as the modern day home of democracy; the standard to which others should aspire. If they want this to be a credible proposition then they can't be satisfied with an oh well at least we're not as bad as so-and-so standard.
In this case, I don't think your speeding analogy works. It would work if there was a small, privileged class of people (other than emergency & police vehicles) who were exempt, for no good reason other than their own sense of entitlement, from the speeding laws that applied to everyone else in the country.
"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
Zeljko - you claim to be well read and knowledgable on the OWS movement, however every time you post, you appear to know nothing about it. OWS is a global movement, not just the USA. The 99% include all the middle class and poor worldwide. You criticize the american OWS youth for not focusing on poorer countries, but is it not wise for them to clean up corruption in their own backyard first? Saying that there are bigger problems elsewhere is not a legitimate excuse for not tackling a problem.
... Don't get me wrong, America needs to be kept corruption free but only talking about America as if it was the entire focus of evil in the world is narrow sited. ...
Who is saying that America is the entire focus of evil in the world?
"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
For most of the last century and to date in this century, the US has touted itself as the modern day home of democracy; the standard to which others should aspire. If they want this to be a credible proposition then they can't be satisfied with an oh well at least we're not as bad as so-and-so standard.
In this case, I don't think your speeding analogy works. It would work if there was a small, privileged class of people (other than emergency & police vehicles) who were exempt, for no good reason other than their own sense of entitlement, from the speeding laws that applied to everyone else in the country.
They are 'exempt' - they are exempt because the self appointed traffic cops are focusing on the USA going 5 over while China and other nations are zooming by at 200 km/hr with human rights violations. They are exempt because many people know very little about what is happening in the first place. What's going on in Mexico is extremely serious and scary - people are killed and bodies are dumped in the streets with impunity, the media is violently intimidated. Why are we not talking about Mexico at all except to talk about our vacations?
Tweet
Comment