Fun and games

@divegeester said
Here’s one: Game 12098725



For several reasons.

Both you little rugrats have been busy with your shovels trying uncover some connection, any connection, between these two.

And this is the best you got?

Good enough for your medieval fantasyland, I suppose.

@suzianne said
Both you little rugrats have been busy with your shovels trying uncover some connection, any connection, between these two.

And this is the best you got?

Good enough for your medieval fantasyland, I suppose.

You seem upset by this suzianne.

@suzianne said
Both you little rugrats have been busy with your shovels trying uncover some connection, any connection, between these two.

And this is the best you got?

Good enough for your medieval fantasyland, I suppose.

"Medieval"?

@divegeester said
Here’s one: Game 12098725



For several reasons.

Does this prove something?

@divegeester said
Here’s one: Game 12098725

A tense struggle for the centre with both sides having
chances until a brilliancy by black finished the game.

Very instructive ... thanks for sharing.

@wolfgang59 said
A tense struggle for the centre with both sides having
chances until a brilliancy by black finished the game.

Very instructive ... thanks for sharing.

I was devastated. 😨

@secondson said
Does this prove something?

Of course not, it’s just interesting to observe Joseph.

@secondson said
I was devastated. 😨

You see, I don’t think you were “devestated”, not in the slightest.

@philokalia said
Dive, this is ridiculous on multiple levels.

The game of chess was "ridiculous", I agree.

[1] josephw's and SecondSon's posting style and content are, in several key ways, almost identical. SecondSon's recent wriggling attempt to use me as a proxy to disagree with the torturer god ideology [my term] was almost word-for-word josephwism.

[2] josephw suddenly stopped posting and SecondSon started a few days later and immediately tackled me with about 20 posts in a row talking to me in exactly the same way as jospehw did - same style, same 'Channelling Dasa' thing ~ a label that JS357 had coined for josephw a couple of years ago.

[3] To obscure this, what josephw needed to do was to be seen to have played a game of chess against SecondSon.

[4] Lo and behold, "they" did.

[5] "They" played one completely bogus game.

It could be wrong, of course, but it's certainly not "ridiculous".

There have been many dozens of posters reinventing themselves over the years with a new name so they could flex a different aspect of their online persona [in SecondSon's case, his 'online tough guy' schtick, which josephw's long posting record rather precluded, although he'd flirted with it] after jettisoning a former name.

I did it myself for a few weeks as a practical joke about 10 years ago when I came at some Far Right Debates forum posters from Even Further Right ~ a joke that most inhabitants of that forum were in on.

There are countless examples of people retiring a screen name and returning with a new one.

Philokalia, you're new here. You don't know this place as well as you think. And you didn't know josephw [nor Dasa for that matter].

What was "ridiculous" was that one-off game that divegeester cited in the OP.

Fun and games, indeed. And harmless, I think.

That's my take on it.

@suzianne said
And this is the best you got?

Just me “spewing troll venom” Suzianne. 🙂

@philokalia said
Dive, this is ridiculous on multiple levels.

I won't go into it because I am politer than that.

Thank goodness for your politeness Jacob.

Phew!

@suzianne said
Good enough for your medieval fantasyland, I suppose.

Still think it’s “fantasyland” Suzianne?

@fmf said
What was "ridiculous" was that one-off game that divegeester cited in the OP.

If you think it was a "one-off", then why did you include a completely different game in your own thread in the Only Chess forum?

How "one-off" can it be if you yourself highlighted a completely different game in your own OP from your own thread? Did you forget all about that game?