Sam Sloan is still not allowed to post in the USCF Forums

[samsloan]

[quote="Grayson"][quote="Randy Bauer"][quote="Grayson"][quote="samsloan"]This whole system of Moderators, super-moderators, the AUG and so on was set up to stop Sam Sloan from posting here.

All of the people appointed to the position of moderator were appointed after saying that Sam Sloan should be banned from posting or words to that effect.

* * * [/quote]

You wouldn't even make my Top One Hundred Worst Forum Posters of all time. I think you've mellowed substantially and have become nearly a model participant here. Keep up the good work.[/quote]

Top 100? Been to see a neurologist lately? If not, you ought to . . . (fill in the blank). :wink:[/quote]

Don't feed the bears, Randy.[/quote]

I have not mellowed. I have just stopped coming here. I hardly ever look at this forum. Whenever I post anything it just gets removed. No reason is ever given.

For example the posting quoted above has already been removed. I posted it just a few hours ago. Apparently the forum moderator followed the rule that all posts by Sam Sloan must be pulled, but forgot to pull the one post that quoted from it.

Sam Sloan

[samsloan]

Post by samsloan
[quote="Grayson"][quote="Randy Bauer"][quote="Grayson"][quote="samsloan"]This whole system of Moderators, super-moderators, the AUG and so on was set up to stop Sam Sloan from posting here.
All of the people appointed to the position of moderator were appointed after saying that Sam Sloan should be banned from posting or words to that effect.
* * * [/quote]
You wouldn't even make my Top One Hundred Worst Forum Posters of all time. I think you've mellowed substantially and have become nearly a model participant here. Keep up the good work.[/quote]
Top 100? Been to see a neurologist lately? If not, you ought to . . . (fill in the blank). :wink:[/quote]
Don't feed the bears, Randy.[/quote]
I have not mellowed. I have just stopped coming here. I hardly ever look at this forum. Whenever I post anything it just gets removed. No reason is ever given.
For example the posting quoted above has already been removed. I posted it just a few hours ago. Apparently the forum moderator followed the rule that all posts by Sam Sloan must be pulled, but forgot to pull the one post that quoted from it.
Sam Sloan

This whole system of Moderators, super-moderators, the AUG and so on was set up to stop Sam Sloan from posting here.

All of the people appointed to the position of moderator were appointed after saying that Sam Sloan should be banned from posting or words to that effect.

The whole issue of "Fake Sam Sloan" postings which resulted in about six lawsuits arose because a certain unmentionable person was posting under my name.

Last week I posted an article here about the 1972 Fischer Spassky Match and about certain people involved all of whom are dead now.

It took only a few hours for that article to be pulled with no notification or reason given.
Sincerely,
Sam Sloan

[samsloan]

When my posts were being pulled in large numbers was especially during the 2006-2007 fiscal year when I made critical remarks about the Big Man at the Top and about a certain person whose name was not allowed to be mentioned in vain. I was banned from posting during almost the entire 2007 election season even though I was an elected member of the board and I was running for re-election. They were allowed to attack me, however. The result was the unmentionable person got elected and multiple lawsuits followed. Many people were appointed moderator solely for attacking me. For example, that is how "Steve of Tennessee" became moderator. Finally, one of the moderators here was arrested by the United States Secret Service in July 2009. He finally pleaded guilty in San Francisco Federal Court and received a suspended sentence.

The reason you do not know about these events is I was banned from posting or if not banned everything I posted was pulled. Only a week ago I posted about some of the people involved in the 1972 Fischer Spassky match who are dead now and that got pulled too. I cannot even tell you about a new sensational article by a former world champion that contains new accusations.

Sam Sloan

[samsloan]

Post by samsloan
When my posts were being pulled in large numbers was especially during the 2006-2007 fiscal year when I made critical remarks about the Big Man at the Top and about a certain person whose name was not allowed to be mentioned in vain. I was banned from posting during almost the entire 2007 election season even though I was an elected member of the board and I was running for re-election. They were allowed to attack me, however. The result was the unmentionable person got elected and multiple lawsuits followed. Many people were appointed moderator solely for attacking me. For example, that is how "Steve of Tennessee" became moderator. Finally, one of the moderators here was arrested by the United States Secret Service in July 2009. He finally pleaded guilty in San Francisco Federal Court and received a suspended sentence.
The reason you do not know about these events is I was banned from posting or if not banned everything I posted was pulled. Only a week ago I posted about some of the people involved in the 1972 Fischer Spassky match who are dead now and that got pulled too. I cannot even tell you about a new sensational article by a former world champion that contains new accusations.
Sam Sloan

samsloan on Wed Feb 18, 2015 1:37 am #290305

eastside wrote:

mfschulte wrote:

tmagchesspgh wrote:If you pull Sam's posts, you will justify his assertion of moderator bias. It will also lend credence to Kevin Bachler's thesis.



So, for instance, all I have to do in order to be allowed to make unfounded accusations of unethical behavior is post that the moderators won't let me make unfounded accusations?

I'm sorry, but if you allow one person to make such accusations, how do you possibly justify stopping someone else from doing the same?

It's not moderator bias, it's enforcement of the current AUG.



I agree. One of the main goals of the AUG has always been to keep unfounded accusations out of the discussions.

Whether someone can tolerate such accusations is not the issue. Whether they're permitted in the first place is the issue. As I read the AUG, they're not.



Surely that was supposed to mean unfounded accusations against people alive and present here.

If somebody posts "Nixon was a Crook", is that a violation of AUG?

I posted some events leading up to the Fischer-Spassky Match in 1972. The moderator removed it but did not give a reason. Why cannot we discuss historical events here?

[samsloan]

It seems that all my posts from the last few days have been pulled now, including one in which Grayson a board member said he could see nothing wrong with it and I must have mellowed and in which a moderator said was still here.

You have just proven my point, which is Sam Sloan is not allowed to post there.

[samsloan]

What do you mean by "Unethical Behavior"?

Suppose I say, "Fischer Forfeited the Second Game of the Match".

Have I just made an accusation of unethical behavior? Is that prohibited under the AUG? What if Fischer really did forfeit the second game of the match?

Sam Sloan

[Jürgen R.]

Post by samsloan
It seems that all my posts from the last few days have been pulled now, including one in which Grayson a board member said he could see nothing wrong with it and I must have mellowed and in which a moderator said was still here.
You have just proven my point, which is Sam Sloan is not allowed to post there.

Seems like a sound idea to me. Ban the jerk. Don't even read
what he writes, just delete it. There is no risk of anything
significant being lost if nobody ever hears from this dung
beatle again.

[samsloan]

Sent at: Wed Feb 18, 2015 3:54 am
From: Terry Winchester
To: samsloan Moderators
Your posts complain of moderator actions, which is prohibited by the AUG under 4v.

Please refrain from repeating these types of posts.

samsloan wrote:

eastside wrote:

mfschulte wrote:

tmagchesspgh wrote:If you pull Sam's posts, you will justify his assertion of moderator bias. It will also lend credence to Kevin Bachler's thesis.



So, for instance, all I have to do in order to be allowed to make unfounded accusations of unethical behavior is post that the moderators won't let me make unfounded accusations?

I'm sorry, but if you allow one person to make such accusations, how do you possibly justify stopping someone else from doing the same?

It's not moderator bias, it's enforcement of the current AUG.



I agree. One of the main goals of the AUG has always been to keep unfounded accusations out of the discussions.

Whether someone can tolerate such accusations is not the issue. Whether they're permitted in the first place is the issue. As I read the AUG, they're not.



Surely that was supposed to mean unfounded accusations against people alive and present here.

If somebody posts "Nixon was a Crook", is that a violation of AUG?

I posted some events leading up to the Fischer-Spassky Match in 1972. The moderator removed it but did not give a reason. Why cannot we discuss historical events here?



samsloan wrote:It seems that all my posts from the last few days have been pulled now, including one in which Grayson a board member said he could see nothing wrong with it and I must have mellowed and in which a moderator said was still here.

You have just proven my point, which is Sam Sloan is not allowed to post here.