Questions for the FG about the organization of the election

[hgm]

Ah, well I don't care to rehash this since you've read it all before I am sure, and were not compelled by it... But the name for the user we are talking about is fake. You can tell it is fake, because the image of the profile matches the name, and is a fictional character from a television show.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714204/

But that is a completely flawed argument. It is a quite common name, and there must be thousands of other, non-fictional people having that name. The scenario where someone uses the photograph of a fictional character that he happens to share the name with, is quite plausible.

[hgm]

In the case you are talking about, the user is a "well known troll". As in, has spent multiple years creating and recreating new accounts on Github, in order to spam threads / discussions / issues on Github, argue and attack developers for changes they don't like, and just generally waste the time of others. Okay, so do you kick the guy because of his activity on Github, even if he might not yet be trolling on talkchess? In general that is a bad idea. But perhaps such a case is extreme and is warranted. I would say moderators exist in part to deal with such things. In this specific case, I believe it to be wrong. Although to be reductive, in this case the user was openly lying about their name on the forum, which itself should have been enough. I mean, we've stripped people of their rights for having funny last names, so you would expect openly fake names to be looked into.

It is really unfortunate. Trying to discredit new members and make them look like trolls, why really? I remember that for a short time, the ShashChess Engine was the most powerful chess engine in the world ranking. But Stockfish members started to disrespect and insult Andrea Manzo because they didn't like another engine being more powerful than theirs.

BTW, I thank the CCRL members for trusting and testing my engine, and I am really happy that the SF members' attempt to destroy my engine was unsuccessful.

Why are you responding in this way to a post which did not mention you?

Because it mentions him?

[AndrewGrant]

Ah, well I don't care to rehash this since you've read it all before I am sure, and were not compelled by it... But the name for the user we are talking about is fake. You can tell it is fake, because the image of the profile matches the name, and is a fictional character from a television show.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714204/

But that is a completely flawed argument. It is a quite common name, and there must be thousands of other, non-fictional people having that name. The scenario where someone uses the photograph of a fictional character that he happens to share the name with, is quite plausible.

I see your point -- but I would say that your view requires a greater number -- well, degree -- of assumptions than mine.

And also, we know the history of names used by this user. This is only the current one. Another one will take its place whenever he decides he wants to post in the SF git pages again, after having been banned many times over.

[Rebel]

Ah, well I don't care to rehash this since you've read it all before I am sure, and were not compelled by it... But the name for the user we are talking about is fake. You can tell it is fake, because the image of the profile matches the name, and is a fictional character from a television show.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714204/

But that is a completely flawed argument. It is a quite common name, and there must be thousands of other, non-fictional people having that name. The scenario where someone uses the photograph of a fictional character that he happens to share the name with, is quite plausible.

I see your point -- but I would say that your view requires a greater number of assumptions than mine.

And also, we know the history of names used by this user. This is only the current one. Another one will take its place whenever he decides he wants to post in the SF git pages again, after having been banned many times over.

But you never showed the evidence.

I checked discord, could not find anything, so where is it.

[AndrewGrant]

Ah, well I don't care to rehash this since you've read it all before I am sure, and were not compelled by it... But the name for the user we are talking about is fake. You can tell it is fake, because the image of the profile matches the name, and is a fictional character from a television show.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714204/

But that is a completely flawed argument. It is a quite common name, and there must be thousands of other, non-fictional people having that name. The scenario where someone uses the photograph of a fictional character that he happens to share the name with, is quite plausible.

I see your point -- but I would say that your view requires a greater number of assumptions than mine.

And also, we know the history of names used by this user. This is only the current one. Another one will take its place whenever he decides he wants to post in the SF git pages again, after having been banned many times over.

But you never showed the evidence.
I checked discord, could not find anything, so where is it.

I don't understand. The evidence of what? Something that dispels HGM's argument? It will be hard to find that retroactively, because as he gets banned from Stockfish pages, his posts get removed. LazySMP is the current name. He has gone by KomodoChess, something with Kasparov Chess, and ginko20, ChessOverflow, atumanian, and some others which I cannot recover as the git accounts are replaced with the text "ghost" after being deleted.

Github could prove that these are the same user, knowing the ips possibly. But a thread like this one ( https://github.com/mcostalba/Stockfish/pull/324 ) has LazySMP using multiple accounts to say the same thing, one by one as they get banned from SF. And then rallied them all for a thread in mcostalba/Stockfish, since bans are not across forks.

[hgm]

Ah, well I don't care to rehash this since you've read it all before I am sure, and were not compelled by it... But the name for the user we are talking about is fake. You can tell it is fake, because the image of the profile matches the name, and is a fictional character from a television show.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714204/

But that is a completely flawed argument. It is a quite common name, and there must be thousands of other, non-fictional people having that name. The scenario where someone uses the photograph of a fictional character that he happens to share the name with, is quite plausible.

I see your point -- but I would say that your view requires a greater number -- well, degree -- of assumptions than mine.

And also, we know the history of names used by this user. This is only the current one. Another one will take its place whenever he decides he wants to post in the SF git pages again, after having been banned many times over.

'Degree of assumptions' sounds rather subjective. Anyway, I am not going to ban people just on assumptions; that would abandon the principle or 'reasonable doubt' applied in the entire civilized world. And since other people are going here by incomplete or fake names, or have no longer any registered name at all, the principle of equal treatment requires either banning all of those, or leave them alone. So I only act on names that have intrinsic problems, other than their factual correctness. If someone wants to call himself Mickey Mouse or Anatoly Karpov I don't think the doubt that this could be his real name can be called 'reasonable'.

What happens in the SF forums is of no relevance. There might be a technical reason that you have to return under a diffrent name, and that someone gets banned there IMO is more likely to be the fault of the SF crowd than of the person anyway. TalkChess is not an subsdiary of the SF discord or GitHub channels. And I guess this is the true cause of the angry responses.

[chrisw]

Ah, well I don't care to rehash this since you've read it all before I am sure, and were not compelled by it... But the name for the user we are talking about is fake. You can tell it is fake, because the image of the profile matches the name, and is a fictional character from a television show.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714204/

But that is a completely flawed argument. It is a quite common name, and there must be thousands of other, non-fictional people having that name. The scenario where someone uses the photograph of a fictional character that he happens to share the name with, is quite plausible.

I see your point -- but I would say that your view requires a greater number -- well, degree -- of assumptions than mine.

And also, we know the history of names used by this user. This is only the current one. Another one will take its place whenever he decides he wants to post in the SF git pages again, after having been banned many times over.

'Degree of assumptions' sounds rather subjective. Anyway, I am not going to ban people just on assumptions; that would abandon the principle or 'reasonable doubt' applied in the entire civilized world. And since other people are going here by incomplete or fake names, or have no longer any registered name at all, the principle of equal treatment requires either banning all of those, or leave them alone. So I only act on names that have intrinsic problems, other than their factual correctness. If someone wants to call himself Mickey Mouse or Anatoly Karpov I don't think the doubt that this could be his real name can be called 'reasonable'.

What happens in the SF forums is of no relevance. There might be a technical reason that you have to return under a diffrent name, and that someone gets banned there IMO is more likely to be the fault of the SF crowd than of the person anyway. TalkChess is not an subsdiary of the SF discord or GitHub channels. And I guess this is the true cause of the angry responses.

When Andrew invented the term "supreme rulers" against the FG, it was actually another confession. He sees himself as "supreme ruler", not of talkchess alone, but across ALL computer chess social media. Offend supreme ruler Andrew on one social media platform and he'll try to drive you off ALL social media platforms. If any platform refuses, then he will terrorise that platform until he gets his way.

[Ciekce]

When Andrew invented the term "supreme rulers" against the FG, it was actually another confession. He sees himself as "supreme ruler", not of talkchess alone, but across ALL computer chess social media. Offend supreme ruler Andrew on one social media platform and he'll try to drive you off ALL social media platforms. If any platform refuses, then he will terrorise that platform until he gets his way.

this is getting somehow more ridiculous than it already was

[towforce]

When Andrew invented the term "supreme rulers" against the FG, it was actually another confession. He sees himself as "supreme ruler", not of talkchess alone, but across ALL computer chess social media. Offend supreme ruler Andrew on one social media platform and he'll try to drive you off ALL social media platforms. If any platform refuses, then he will terrorise that platform until he gets his way.

this is getting somehow more ridiculous than it already was

[LazySMP]

Ah, well I don't care to rehash this since you've read it all before I am sure, and were not compelled by it... But the name for the user we are talking about is fake. You can tell it is fake, because the image of the profile matches the name, and is a fictional character from a television show.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1714204/

This discussion has already been done completely in kindergarten. I had changed my avatar after Guenther's post on GitHub.
http://talkchess.com/viewtopic.php?t=84382