An RHP Curiosity

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Animosity is not my bag, Smaug. Simply provided the April post today in reply to your request. Nowadays half the fun of chess is relaxed conversation.

You're a far more accomplished player than I am. Why do you think I tried to engage you in the first place? Possibility of becoming friends. That's all.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

You've got quite a bitter attitude for a successful professional in a critical field. You threaten so easily and you love to threaten back. Sad indeed.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
You've got quite a bitter attitude for a successful professional in a critical field. You threaten so easily and you love to threaten back. Sad indeed.

The Sad part about the interewebz, is you do not know if the person you are talking to is a he/she or actually does what they say they are doing. Taking everything at face value on the interwebz I have found, can be a huge mistake. I talk from past experiences, and nothing that happened on RHP.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Friendly invite was offered. You chose to decline it for your own good reasons. You now attempt to intimidate me with an unfriendly invite. No thanks, Smaug.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Nobody particular in mind. It's common knowledge that attacks occur daily and that the typical pattern is the strong under attack by the weak.

Originally posted by Silverstriker
change the board - i start with maybe 3 extra rooks or something? 😀

or a different proposal

for every 200 point lead the player loses an item of value 1 (so a pawn)

so for instance if i played red night (2000 rated ish) then he would lose a value of 4 (so a knight/pawn) before play commenced.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Smaug, you're losing your grasp. Listen up: (1) Wishful premise of this thread's initial post was simply... 'Wouldn't it be nice if members took out their aggressions on the 64 squares Russ & Chris have provided and avail themselves of the various forums for good spirited conversation. (2) It was presented as a 'help me understand' question, rather than a declarative remark, in the hope of stimulating open and honest discussion. (3) Coming home from poolside ping pong, several laps and enjoyable conversations with a half dozen couples and families I open the laptop to discover your emotional reply demanding examples by way of 'proof'. (4) After responding to your request I sadly realize my premise did not embrace the hard fact that many people, on a chess site as well as in professional life, are unfortunately technically competent but emotionally insecure. Many low rated chess players are salt of the earth mentally and emotionally strong... just too devoted to providing for and taking care of their families to indulge in frivolity and major on minor things such as recreational games, including chess. (5) In your secret heart you well know you declined my April offer and are attempting to seize the initiative now because the public spotlight is upon you. You have little to offer any opponent, to the extent that your tournament only format precludes casual conversation. Perhaps you'll come to your senses and grow out of this subjective ego fixation. (6) If you genuinely believe you were in my mind today before the swim or that this thread is all about 'Sicilian Smaug' you, Sir, are more in love with yourself and over the deep end than I previously imagined. You made considerable effort to hijack an impersonal conversational gambit for the sole purpose of putting your truly down so that you might stand upon his head and appear to be five or six inches taller. (7) To make matters even worse you then attempt to distribute your wrested premise to "other users" to absolve yourself of pettiness and sow seeds of discord. None of us are strong or weak because of what we do but because of what and how we think. Though we all have our shortcomings the strong are gentle, nuanced in their sensitivities, gracious, kind and generous with their forgiveness.

Peace.

Originally posted by Thomaster
Maybe there is no relation between attacking other members and playing chess.

Why, in your opinion, do some members persist in attacking other members... including real or imagined adversaries, new posters and members?

Originally posted by Palynka
Not wanting to play chess with you is not cowardice.

Cowardice is making veiled but unnamed accusations, for example. Like you just did.

This conversation is not about you or me. It is about a curious dynamic which seems intent on permeating this general forum.

Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Why, in your opinion, do some members persist in attacking other members... including real or imagined adversaries, new posters and members?

because liars, charlatans and snake oil salesmen need to be smacked around. act like an ass and you get treated like one. it's that simple.