TN wrote on 11/20/11 at 14:10:30:


Against any player that's not an outright beginner I will queen every pawn possible, and toy around with them.

I've done it quite a few times in tournaments. I pay my opponents due respect and resign hopeless positions - if my opponents don't do the same then I will torture them.

TN wrote on 11/20/11 at 14:10:30:


Or just three knights vs. king. That could be amusing.

If you are winning very easily and your opponent refuses to resign, is it rude to promote all your pawns to knights before delivering the checkmate? Or to force B+N vs. King in a dead won position so that you can show off your mastery of this endgame?

TalJechin wrote on 11/18/11 at 18:45:01:

That's not what I wrote. What I wrote is that I don't exclude the possibility that some indegenious tribes - I dislike political correctness, we in Suriname just call them Indians - near the Brazilian border practize this. I'm not eager to find out. The skinned body of a dead monkey is disgusting enough for me and thát's something I've seen.
My point is that Markovich' disgusting post was not directed against any special segment of humanity.

TalJechin wrote on 11/18/11 at 18:45:01:

Are you kidding? So discrimination of fat and old people is acceptable, but discrimination of white people isn't? If the answer is no you can't seriously back this argument.

TalJechin wrote on 11/18/11 at 18:45:01:

In civilized countries discrimination of old and fat people is also a real crime.
If somebody would seriously put "ban the old and the fat" in practice he/she would be prosecuted in the USA, Suriname and The Netherlands. I hope it's the same in Sweden too.

Your reply to that post was brilliant, TalJechin, and was an important reason for me to further neglect that post. But you bring up some bad arguments against Markovich. That obviously doesn't mean I entirely agree with him.

Now it's for me:  because I don't like this discussion at all - and as we all know I'm very fond of bad jokes.

Quote:


In my opinion it should be offensive to any human being capable of any kind of empathy. Pray tell where in Suriname and in what other countries you can eat the brain of a living monkey while it's looking up at you in bewilderment as you dip your spoon into its brain. Sounds like a meal for a serial killer

Btw, turning the groups mentioned into different races or creeds are beside the point as the obese, and definitely the old, are part of practically all races and religious beliefs and in any chesstm below the top GM events those groups together could well constitute a majority of the contestants. 

And even courts and states allow themselves to discriminate against the majority in some cases, e.g. by allowing a quota from a less qualified minority group take education places from the white majority even though the latter have better grades.

To compare, it would be a fairer comparison to say: Would you feel the same way about Markovich's post if he promised to eat the brain of a living child at the board? Maybe that is also regarded a delicates by some cannibal tribe deep in the jungle somewhere...   

At least in this case we replace a crime with another stronger crime, while in your case you replace a moral crime with a real crime.

It seems Swift's Modest Proposal would be sending half you lot running for the moderators...enough synthetic outrage, let's talk chess.

@TalJechin: Non sequitur.  If I am arguably, occasionally guilty of misconduct, it doesn't make me inelligible to complain about what I perceive to be someone else's bad conduct. 

@Michael Ayton, Bibs: Not all satirical statements are within the bounds of acceptable publication here, e.g., satirical comments based on race certainly are not.  I do not significantly disguish between comments based on race and those based on age.  

I come here to be part of a chess forum, not expecting to read edgy, which appears to mean profoundly obnoxious but just possibly funny, attempts at humor.  

I believe I've expressed my point of view; I'm not going to rejoin further on this subject.

I have to say I struggle to understand your perspectives here, Markovich. Surely it's [i]self-evident[/i] that post #92 is satire, and surely the fact of it being satire, far from being irrelevant, decisively determines how it's to be read. Were it [i]not[/i] satire, of course it would be obnoxious. As it is, harbouring of the stereotypes it presents is not being endorsed so much as being debunked. It's not a question of 'overweight' or 'old' people needing protection, because it's simply not them who's being attacked, unless of course you take the view that to hold up a stereotype [i]even[/i] in a jestful, satirical or ironic way is effectively to endorse it.

I grant that the satire is edgy, on account of the salty psychological realism of its author's 'pose' as a crudely prejudiced, unempathetic thickhead, and it's also open to the charge of being rather hyperbolically scathing in the face of John arguably getting a bit over-earnest about a chess opponent chomping a bit of chocolate. But simply obnoxious and unacceptable? Say so and what else are you going to condemn? -- [i]The Life of Brian[/i]?