Page 24 of 27 FirstFirst ... 142223242526 ... LastLast
Results 346 to 360 of 399

Thread: Heard It On The Grape Vine

  1. | #346
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Axiom View Post
    There was no hacking including password guessing.
    So you say, but you are a proven liar and there is no reason for me to believe you.

    What you call my lies; are simply a natural essential component part of the production of an hydra protest.
    And they are now what you see as a natural essential component of your futile attempt to get yourself unbanned. So there is still no reason to believe you after so many lies.

    I made no such claim. I merely stated it as a possibility to counter the level of certainty with which you held your claim.
    You mean, with which you claim I hold it. There is easily sufficient evidence to assume that you took over some or all of those accounts by password-guessing or some other form of hacking. There is no evidence at all to support any other hypothesis.

    Obviously when you make a protest hydra it is a given that the username is a lie!
    Not necessarily; depends on the username. The lies were statements that you made in posts.

    Why does the average reasonable person need to be au fait with forums to speak to what is seriously illegal?
    They might not have much understanding of some of the legal issues prone to arise on forums. Anyway, stop avoiding the question, since you think you know what the average reasonable person would find seriously illegal, tell us.

    You only find it reasonable because it suits you.
    My mind doesn't work like that. If a belief inconveniences me but the evidence leads me to it, I will hold it anyway. Others say that one can "choose" to believe things but I have never seen any evidence that this is so.

    Would the reasonable chess forum observer consider that i have already served a ban proportionate to any of your scenarios depicted there?
    Not after considering the number of chances you were given, yet you continued breaking agreements, lying and breaking the rules.

    In terms of where i have evolved to today i would not see such conflicts arising ie. i would not fall foul of these behaviour guidelines.
    But you have said this before and it was all lies before so there is no reason to believe a claim by you to have changed. You also showed with your kjenhager hydra that you could fake being reasonable and inoffensive when it suited you and then revert to form.

    It is completely illogical to assume that just because i continue to complain about what i saw as disproportionate punishment means that i haven't changed in other pragmatic and realistic terms.
    Occam's Razor again. There is no evidence that you have changed (just your baseless assertions) and you are a known liar. It is completely logical then to assume you are lying again unless you present evidence that you have changed in a way that means you would behave. Even if you could present such evidence convincingly while remaining anonymous it would make no difference: you would remain permanently banned to deter others.

    Yeah right, so nothing stands out in that super memory of yours!
    What stands out is that I do have some desire to save myself some time by not addressing every aspect of your question-drifting tactics. As I mentioned, the primary issue with you is material that is annoying rather than illegal.

    Are you willing to test that with a one week trial?

    I am a changed man. I know the boundaries that i must adhere to at cc and feel i have served my time. A one week trial couldn't hurt anyone, could it?
    A one-week trial would show only at best that you had managed to behave yourself for that particular week because it suited you. It would have no long-term predictive value. Most likely given previous trials you would break the rules again during that week and then go on a long cycle of again attempting to claim you had changed. You would also gloat about sucking us in as you have in the past.

    But I don't care if you have changed or not. I will never unban you unless I know who you are. It's a complete waste of your time trying to convince me otherwise. When people push past a certain point I will never give them another chance unless it is on my terms. There are people who have been learning this lesson for 20 years - a lot longer than you!

    You confuse and conflate protest action with regular forum misbehaviour, hence unfairly compounding the picture against me.
    Your "protest action" is worse than regular forum misbehaviour. That's why AC has had many short bans but we have never banned him for good.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  2. | #347
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing at Hobsons Bay chess club where the tournaments are the best value in the state!
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Even if you could present such evidence convincingly while remaining anonymous it would make no difference: you would remain permanently banned to deter others.
    Thus spoke Dr Kevin Bonham the Stalinist of Australian Chess. Bonham the non elected undemocratic dictator of Chesschat. who life bans chess players from posting on a chess forum. Axiom is right when he suggests that the life ban punishment is ridiculous.
    Ozchess died on the 7/4/2013- killed by Gatekeepers



  3. | #348
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firegoat7 View Post
    Thus spoke Dr Kevin Bonham the Stalinist of Australian Chess. Bonham the non elected undemocratic dictator of Chesschat. who life bans chess players from posting on a chess forum. Axiom is right when he suggests that the life ban punishment is ridiculous.
    You, David Beaumont, are a ridiculous pariah of the Australian chess scene who was thrown out of a tournament for fighting and deservedly banned from at least one chess club. What you think about me reflects only your own extreme stupidity and hateful bias against me, and your analogies just show your incredible political cluelessness.

    Consider this stoooooooopid, if you are capable of considering anything at all: if I was a dictator, I would have supreme power on my own. But I don't. Three of us on CC have equal admin power and that's even without mentioning the site owner.

    So for instance, as far as I'm concerned MOZ stays banned for life and I will certainly never unban him. But if one of the other admins or the site owner decided to unban him I couldn't do the slightest thing about it.

    That doesn't make me much of a "dictator".

    Plus this is no place to talk about being "elected". The terms of the "elected moderators" here have long ago expired, and the only real elections here as opposed to Russian-style scams were the ones voluntarily run by me.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  4. | #349
    Siberian Chess Tiger Axiom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    So you say, but you are a proven liar and there is no reason for me to believe you.

    And they are now what you see as a natural essential component of your futile attempt to get yourself unbanned. So there is still no reason to believe you after so many lies.
    Lies as inherent to the acts of protest cannot be extrapolated to "proven liar" .. it discredits you to repeatedly attempt this long bow leap.



    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    You mean, with which you claim I hold it. There is easily sufficient evidence to assume that you took over some or all of those accounts by password-guessing or some other form of hacking. There is no evidence at all to support any other hypothesis.

    Not necessarily; depends on the username. The lies were statements that you made in posts.
    There is zero evidence that i password guessed/hacked any account. How do i know? - because i know i never did it! .... and i'm not lying as i'm not using or posting with protest hydras on chesschat!


    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Not after considering the number of chances you were given, yet you continued breaking agreements, lying and breaking the rules.

    But you have said this before and it was all lies before so there is no reason to believe a claim by you to have changed. You also showed with your kjenhager hydra that you could fake being reasonable and inoffensive when it suited you and then revert to form.

    Occam's Razor again. There is no evidence that you have changed (just your baseless assertions) and you are a known liar. It is completely logical then to assume you are lying again unless you present evidence that you have changed in a way that means you would behave. Even if you could present such evidence convincingly while remaining anonymous it would make no difference: you would remain permanently banned to deter others.
    that was a very long time ago .. as i said people change, they learn adapt evolve .... you could learn the art of forgiveness perhaps.


    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    A one-week trial would show only at best that you had managed to behave yourself for that particular week because it suited you. It would have no long-term predictive value. Most likely given previous trials you would break the rules again during that week and then go on a long cycle of again attempting to claim you had changed. You would also gloat about sucking us in as you have in the past.

    But I don't care if you have changed or not. I will never unban you unless I know who you are. It's a complete waste of your time trying to convince me otherwise. When people push past a certain point I will never give them another chance unless it is on my terms. There are people who have been learning this lesson for 20 years - a lot longer than you!
    Who would prejudice themselves more? - you for allowing me back or me for completely pulling the rug from under my own feet, contradicting totally everything i have said here? Obviously i would be taking a completely different tack to those days long since past when i was belligerently in protest mode. If passing a one week test proves nothing then on that basis how about a 1 month, 3mths or 1 year test?

    Were i to transgress and be re-lifebanned then you will never hear another word on the subject from me anywhere online. You have nothing to lose, if i lose i just make myself look like a complete hypocritical fool (as opposed to my behaviour during protest actions as you contend!) You also get a chance to look like a saint, rather than an old stubborn curmudgeon! So you have nothing to lose and perhaps something to gain.
    "Don't let the snow get down the back of your pants" ~ SCT

  5. | #350
    Siberian Chess Tiger Axiom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    if I was a dictator, I would have supreme power on my own. But I don't. Three of us on CC have equal admin power ..
    We don't hear much about these life-bans from the other two. Are they still in favour of them to this day?
    "Don't let the snow get down the back of your pants" ~ SCT

  6. | #351
    Senior Member antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Byron Bay, NSW
    Posts
    4,613

    Default

    Axiom, why isn't FG calling you a sycophant? in other words a crawler

  7. | #352
    Siberian Chess Tiger Axiom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by antichrist View Post
    Axiom, why isn't FG calling you a sycophant? in other words a crawler
    Perhaps because i'm not one.
    Some are starting to say i could be the Nelson Mandela of Australian Chess.
    Last edited by Axiom; 17-04-18 at 10:22 PM.
    "Don't let the snow get down the back of your pants" ~ SCT

  8. | #353
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Axiom View Post
    Lies as inherent to the acts of protest cannot be extrapolated to "proven liar" .. it discredits you to repeatedly attempt this long bow leap.
    Rubbish. If you lie repeatedly you're a liar. One can be a liar for a range of reasons, some worse than others - the reasons do not matter to the facts.

    What you call "protest" was in fact simply circumvention. When you had the kjenhager hydra you weren't protesting anything, you were just flying under the radar and trying to avoid being caught until finally you couldn't help yourself with your SCT mania and gave the game away.

    Someone who lies to try to avoid punishment will every bit as easily lie to try to get a punishment cancelled. Anyone who would trust you is a fool.

    There is zero evidence that i password guessed/hacked any account. How do i know? - because i know i never did it! .... and i'm not lying as i'm not using or posting with protest hydras on chesschat!
    Account holders whose word we have no reason to doubt say they did not give their accounts away. You say they did, but you are a proven liar.

    Your claim re not using hydras is a non sequitur. We last caught some as recently as eight months ago. They've generally become more sporadic since we introduced pre-screening so such a gap does not mean anything. As for you not using others' accounts, you could well have simply run out of easily guessable passwords!

    that was a very long time ago .. as i said people change, they learn adapt evolve .... you could learn the art of forgiveness perhaps.
    And I should forgive someone who responded to being deservedly banned by persistently defaming and abusing me? That's not the art of forgiveness, that's the art of unconscionable stupidity. You continue claiming you have changed but there is no evidence at all, it is just more lies. A prominent, abject, unequivocal and unconditional public apology for all your defamation would be a start if you had really changed at all. It is what anyone with any moral qualities whatsoever would have done long ago in your position.

    There is a point past which I do not forgive. You went past that point by wasting too much of my time. The only way I let you back on CC is if I know who you are.

    Who would prejudice themselves more? - you for allowing me back or me for completely pulling the rug from under my own feet, contradicting totally everything i have said here?
    You wouldn't care less if you compromised your own credibility as you don't have any. You would just ignore it and carry on like before, just like when you contemptibly pretended to have died in order to incite others into believing you had really died and blame me for it.

    Obviously i would be taking a completely different tack to those days long since past when i was belligerently in protest mode. If passing a one week test proves nothing then on that basis how about a 1 month, 3mths or 1 year test?

    Were i to transgress and be re-lifebanned then you will never hear another word on the subject from me anywhere online.
    Given your repeated lies there is no reason whatsoever to believe that. You would break that commitment

    You have nothing to lose, if i lose i just make myself look like a complete hypocritical fool
    That's exactly what you are already. So you would have nothing to lose.

    You also get a chance to look like a saint, rather than an old stubborn curmudgeon! So you have nothing to lose and perhaps something to gain.
    What I have to lose is:

    1. My integrity, because I would have gone back on what I repeatedly stated.
    2. The ability of deterring others as a consequence of 1.
    3. The effort of cleaning up your garbage when you inevitably pushed boundaries or transgressed again.
    4. My sense of justice. You deserve to be banned for life unless you tell us who you are so we can keep you under control if you are readmitted. It would be wrong for me to annul this punishment.

    We don't hear much about these life-bans from the other two. Are they still in favour of them to this day?
    They've never indicated otherwise and they continue to assist with spotting and banning your hydras. Really, the fact that you deserve permanent banning is so bleeding obvious that it's not something we would bother revisiting.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  9. | #354
    Siberian Chess Tiger Axiom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    4,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Rubbish. If you lie repeatedly you're a liar. One can be a liar for a range of reasons, some worse than others - the reasons do not matter to the facts.
    Unremitting Garbage. Lies in one context do not necessarily confer to lies in another.

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    What you call "protest" was in fact simply circumvention. When you had the kjenhager hydra you weren't protesting anything, you were just flying under the radar and trying to avoid being caught until finally you couldn't help yourself with your SCT mania and gave the game away.
    Nope, it was a protest by evading detection. It was a statement of defiance. I purposely gave the game away to underscore that very point!

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Someone who lies to try to avoid punishment will every bit as easily lie to try to get a punishment cancelled. Anyone who would trust you is a fool.
    You keep repeating the error of confusing different contexts for the lying.



    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Account holders whose word we have no reason to doubt say they did not give their accounts away. You say they did, but you are a proven liar.
    So why do you assume that they are not lying? Your thinking seems blinded by your vindictiveness, malevolence and unforgiving pathology.

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    Your claim re not using hydras is a non sequitur.
    i mean't as in - now on this thread, not in the general sense.



    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    And I should forgive someone who responded to being deservedly banned by persistently defaming and abusing me? That's not the art of forgiveness, that's the art of unconscionable stupidity. You continue claiming you have changed but there is no evidence at all, it is just more lies. A prominent, abject, unequivocal and unconditional public apology for all your defamation would be a start if you had really changed at all. It is what anyone with any moral qualities whatsoever would have done long ago in your position.
    that was all a long time ago .. and as far as defamation is concerned that was clearly part of the protest action.

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    There is a point past which I do not forgive. You went past that point by wasting too much of my time.
    yes you're a very busy man.



    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    You wouldn't care less if you compromised your own credibility as you don't have any. You would just ignore it and carry on like before, just like when you contemptibly pretended to have died in order to incite others into believing you had really died and blame me for it.
    again you ignore the difference in contexts



    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    That's exactly what you are already. So you would have nothing to lose.
    why did you lie there by omission by excluding my parentheses?



    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    What I have to lose is:

    1. My integrity, because I would have gone back on what I repeatedly stated.
    2. The ability of deterring others as a consequence of 1.
    3. The effort of cleaning up your garbage when you inevitably pushed boundaries or transgressed again.
    4. My sense of justice. You deserve to be banned for life unless you tell us who you are so we can keep you under control if you are readmitted. It would be wrong for me to annul this punishment.
    That's why i said you would look like a saint!



    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    They've never indicated otherwise and they continue to assist with spotting and banning your hydras. Really, the fact that you deserve permanent banning is so bleeding obvious that it's not something we would bother revisiting.
    I just thought it odd how quiet they are on the subject considering that as you say - you operate as a threesome. You say bleeding obvious , but you missed the point - it's what do THEY say!? .. we see bleeding little of it.
    "Don't let the snow get down the back of your pants" ~ SCT

  10. | #355
    Volunteer MOZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    MOZ* is my main signon; PMs to me should be directed here. Other special purpose signons are used.
    Posts
    4,973

    Default Caution: Entering an evidence free zone.

    Quote Originally Posted by Axiom View Post
    ...




    I just thought it odd how quiet they are on the subject considering that as you say - you operate as a threesome. You say bleeding obvious , but you missed the point - it's what do THEY say!? .. we see bleeding little of it.
    Nice observation.
    FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

  11. | #356
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Axiom View Post
    Unremitting Garbage. Lies in one context do not necessarily confer to lies in another.
    Except it is the same context - you attempting to obtain/preserve the ability to post on Chesschat. And once a person accepts that habitual lying is acceptable in one context they obviously lack a moral objection to doing it and are therefore far more likely to do it in another anyway.

    Nope, it was a protest by evading detection. It was a statement of defiance. I purposely gave the game away to underscore that very point!
    Rubbish. You conveyed no defiance to anyone, it was obvious that you were disguising your identity so you could stay on the forum (including playing chess games) and not to make any statement.

    So why do you assume that they are not lying?
    There is no reason to believe they are all lying, while there is abundant reason to believe you specifically are. You're known to lie, you're known to break forum rules and you're known to be obsessive about attempting to post on Chesschat.

    Your thinking seems blinded by your vindictiveness, malevolence and unforgiving pathology.
    No it's actually just a rational response to the facts. Whereas you were trying to convince me one post ago that you have changed and yet this clueless abusive garbage from you shows that you haven't changed at all.

    i mean't as in - now on this thread, not in the general sense.
    Well that makes no difference. You'll lie with whatever account you like. It's multiple accounts but the same lying liar who lies behind all of them. You used this account when you faked your own death to try to incite tossers here into blaming me.

    that was all a long time ago .. and as far as defamation is concerned that was clearly part of the protest action.
    Rubbish; you were buying into firegoat's pimplebrained "Stalin" rubbish just last month. If you have changed you will realise that you were deservedly banned and that your so-called "protest action" was wrong and made you even more deserving of banning. If you are still defending that garbage you are still the same.

    why did you lie there by omission by excluding my parentheses?
    As with your fellow habitual liars on this site you try to muddy the waters about your own lying by falsely accusing me of lying. On an internet forum it is not lying to truncate a quote at the point where one has quoted the section which one wishes to respond to. I just do it to save space. Especially not when the post being quoted is above so anyone can see it. On the other hand if you were to quote some of my text and take bits out of the middle of the quoted section without including a [..] or similar to show that something in the middle had been removed, that would be deceptive and dishonest.

    I just thought it odd how quiet they are on the subject
    There is no reason for them to discuss it on CC where it has not been a topic of discussion much since it happened, and Bill tends to have better things to do with his time than post here, while RW quit posting on this silly forum entirely.

    Quote Originally Posted by MOZ View Post
    Nice observation.
    CONGRATULATIONS YOU INCREASED YOUR POSTCOUNT!
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  12. | #357
    Member OzChessFM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    68

    Default


  13. | #358
    Senior Member Firegoat7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Currently playing at Hobsons Bay chess club where the tournaments are the best value in the state!
    Posts
    3,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HydraTED View Post
    No it's actually just a rational response to the facts.
    Dr Kevin Bonham does not behave rationally. Dr Kevin Bonham is nut bag who berates ANYBODY who doesn't agree with him. Take for example his ridiculous personal attack against IM Leonid Sandler. Dr Kevin Bonham is not a rational person.
    Last edited by Firegoat7; 19-04-18 at 12:55 PM.
    Ozchess died on the 7/4/2013- killed by Gatekeepers



  14. | #359
    Senior Membaaaaaa HydraTED's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    826

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Firegoat7 View Post
    Dr Kevin Bonham does not behave rationally. Dr Kevin Bonham is nut bag who berates ANYBODY who doesn't agree with him. Take for example his ridiculous personal attack against IM Leonid Sandler over the 2017 MCC blitz event. Dr Kevin Bonham is not a rational person.
    Hope it gives you your jollies to keep trying to continually namebomb me. If the idea is to defame me for people looking me up on search engines in another context, then quite aside from the obvious irate stupidity of your posts, this site has all the SEO of a dead mouse in a musty attic.

    I've now and then changed my views on various things as a result of people far more intelligent and sensible than you pointing out things I hadn't considered, so your claim that I berate anyone who disagrees is an incorrect cliche.

    As for the Chief Arbiter of the 2016 Victorian (not 2017 and not MCC, so you have your facts wrong again, twice!) blitz event, he made arbiting errors so severe that the FIDE Rules Commission ruled he had departed from the FIDE Laws of Chess and the FIDE Qualifications Commission agreed with the ACF's recommendation to not FIDE-rate the tournament. At least one senior figure on the FIDE Arbiters Commission expressed surprise that we hadn't banned him for his serious errors! Far from being ridiculous, my comments about his performance were extremely well supported by this evidence and by the complaints of players about the running of the tournament.

    The idea that someone as obviously frothy and unstable as you - someone so deranged that they threaten other internet users with violence - could convince anyone that I was a "nut bag" or "irrational" is laughable. Go whip me harder with that big warm paranoid lettuce of yours.
    Note: I have poster antichrist on ignore. On no account should anyone assume that I agree with, or am unable to refute, any comment by poster antichrist, simply because I have not responded to it. Chances are I have not even seen it. (NB Quoting posts by antichrist to try to get around this issue will mostly be ineffective). I am also sometimes denied the ability of reply to false accusations in the shoutbox.

  15. | #360
    Senior Member antichrist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Byron Bay, NSW
    Posts
    4,613

    Default

    struth, I never had one complaint when I was running the Sydney Easter Cup for years, put me ahead of him for the Norfolk Island gig

Page 24 of 27 FirstFirst ... 142223242526 ... LastLast

Members who have read this thread since 15-10-18, 01:04 AM : 0

Actions :  (View-Readers)  (Set Date)  (Clear Date)

There are no names to display.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •