Hmmm, accept that Giddins may still be a "true believer" but I really don't think there are that many others now.Jonathan Bryant wrote: ↑Sat Jun 12, 2021 8:06 pmIs this true? I"m not so sure. If it is, it's only because Ray is less a fashionable cause than he once was.Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑Fri Jun 11, 2021 10:25 pmHis failings are certainly well known, and largely accepted at least in significant part, *now*.
But that is very much down to certain people who refused to accept the cosy consensus at the time, and worked to expose those flaws.
For instance, even in the early years of this forum it is possible to find people claiming that criticism of RDK was mainly if not entirely down to "envy". You hardly ever see that always totally laughable canard these days, at least.
I've no doubt that Giddens, Saunders, Upham and the like would be just as happy to champion him again in the future should the wind change direction
Nice 74
-
- Posts: 5237
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Nice 74
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 3452
- Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 3:54 pm
Re: Nice 74
I agree. But what I’m saying is that they would happily go back.Matt Mackenzie wrote: ↑
Hmmm, accept that Giddins may still be a "true believer" but I really don't think there are that many others now.
Nothing more is known about Ray now than was known when Saunders and Upham were extremely proactive In counter attacking the evidence of his plagiarism
The Abysmal Depths of Chess: https://theabysmaldepthsofchess.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1523
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: Nice 74
So a different point I think. I was arguing earlier that GM Keene has been held accountable for his plagiarism. As far as I know in all the cases the injured party was compensated. Not all details in the public domain of course, but still, I don't think there is any sense in which he got away with it or that his reputation is intact.
In passing, I read Jon Ronson's "So you have been publicly shamed" a few years ago. I found it very interesting.
I'm extremely uncomfortable with the Keenipedia numbers discussed earlier in the thread. The idea that GM Keene is canceled and anyone interacting with him should be censured seems wrong to me. I think sometimes that is appropriate - we already discussed Brian Eley. But not a proportionate response here. I think the right response to someone writing mediocre books is it becomes known they write mediocre books.
Is that the point of disagreement? Or something more subtle?
In passing, I read Jon Ronson's "So you have been publicly shamed" a few years ago. I found it very interesting.
I'm extremely uncomfortable with the Keenipedia numbers discussed earlier in the thread. The idea that GM Keene is canceled and anyone interacting with him should be censured seems wrong to me. I think sometimes that is appropriate - we already discussed Brian Eley. But not a proportionate response here. I think the right response to someone writing mediocre books is it becomes known they write mediocre books.
Is that the point of disagreement? Or something more subtle?
-
- Posts: 5833
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: Nice 74
"I'm extremely uncomfortable with the Keenipedia numbers discussed earlier in the thread. The idea that GM Keene is canceled and anyone interacting with him should be censured seems wrong to me. I think sometimes that is appropriate - we already discussed Brian Eley. But not a proportionate response here. I think the right response to someone writing mediocre books is it becomes known they write mediocre books.
Is that the point of disagreement? Or something more subtle?"
I think your first point is a very good one, especially when innocent bystanders are being subjected to bile, abuse, aggression and bullying. I did talk to Brian Eley many years ago, (long before he left the country), when he was running a bookstall. He gave a useful insight (which in hindsight was pretty accurate) into his view of the workings of the BCF. It's ironic that some of the same people later helped him. I would not expect to have a conversation with him now.
There has been sexual abuse, violence to women, cheating, large-scale fraud, a junior not being selected for the England Juniors as his father ( a lawyer) had once represented angry sponsors who had sued the BCF for return of their money, juniors being bullied in print as the parents had declined offers from coaches to tutor them...
I think all of these are much more important than the topic of "Nice 74".
Do the Keene-haters understand the word "subtle"?
Is that the point of disagreement? Or something more subtle?"
I think your first point is a very good one, especially when innocent bystanders are being subjected to bile, abuse, aggression and bullying. I did talk to Brian Eley many years ago, (long before he left the country), when he was running a bookstall. He gave a useful insight (which in hindsight was pretty accurate) into his view of the workings of the BCF. It's ironic that some of the same people later helped him. I would not expect to have a conversation with him now.
There has been sexual abuse, violence to women, cheating, large-scale fraud, a junior not being selected for the England Juniors as his father ( a lawyer) had once represented angry sponsors who had sued the BCF for return of their money, juniors being bullied in print as the parents had declined offers from coaches to tutor them...
I think all of these are much more important than the topic of "Nice 74".
Do the Keene-haters understand the word "subtle"?
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Nice 74
One point that occurs here is that if Ray becomes involved in things, they immediately start being done improperly, and for that reason alone you would want him kept away from things, and it's a real danger signal when people who are nfluential in English chess are buddies with him or are involved in his schemes.Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:35 amI think sometimes that is appropriate - we already discussed Brian Eley. But not a proportionate response here
Also, you'd really want some kind of acknowledgment of his past, both from him and his associates. Does Nigel Short, for instance, acknowledge Ray's forty years of misconduct? This kind of matters when you're talking about a Vice-President of FIDE. We're not talking about Joe Bloggs who can hang around with whoever he likes because it doesn't matter.
Why "extremely", though? How important are they really?Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:35 amI'm extremely uncomfortable with the Keenipedia numbers discussed earlier in the thread.
However, once again for people who haven't read the previous posts:Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 9:25 amThere has been sexual abuse, violence to women, cheating, large-scale fraud, a junior not being selected for the England Juniors as his father ( a lawyer) had once represented angry sponsors who had sued the BCF for return of their money, juniors being bullied in print as the parents had declined offers from coaches to tutor them...
I think all of these are much more important than the topic of "Nice 74".
1. everybody knows this
2. it's essentially irrelevant because taking an interest in one mater in no way prevents anybody from taking an interest in the other
3. the only point of connection between the two is that both Eley and Keene were shielded by the culture of the society in which they operated, which is one of people looking after their mates and a general hostility towards the asking of awkward questions.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1523
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: Nice 74
Because they look to me like an example of "people looking after their mates and a general hostility towards the asking of awkward questions."JustinHorton wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 9:33 amWhy "extremely", though? How important are they really?Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:35 amI'm extremely uncomfortable with the Keenipedia numbers discussed earlier in the thread.
Much easier to demonise GM Keene than to deal with the awkward real world issues of determining a proportionate response. Having been bullied does not justify becoming a bully, two wrongs don't make a right, etc.
It would be nice to live in a world where the good guys are stalwart and true and always win and the bad guys are easily determined by their black hats and pointy horns. But everyone should know that is a lie.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Nice 74
That's just a straw-man response. Everything's not black and white? Thanks for letting us know.
How do they, specifically? Whose mates are being looked after, and the asking of which awkward questions is being discouraged? (Isn't the answer in both cases manifestly "none"?)Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:23 amBecause they look to me like an example of "people looking after their mates and a general hostility towards the asking of awkward questions."JustinHorton wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 9:33 amWhy "extremely", though? How important are they really?Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:35 amI'm extremely uncomfortable with the Keenipedia numbers discussed earlier in the thread.
What, specifically, is "demonise" here? What is Ray being accused of that he has not done? Isn't "demonise" a silly term in the circumstances?
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1523
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: Nice 74
I am bit conscious I am going to lose this argument, since Justin is better at debating than me. That is based on experience. I also understand that is a huge tactical error to answer the questions posed, one he rarely makes himself. But I can't actually see how I lose the ending yet, and as the sports psychologists say, if we have the right attitude we never lose, we either win or we learn.JustinHorton wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:34 amThat's just a straw-man response. Everything's not black and white? Thanks for letting us know.
How do they, specifically? Whose mates are being looked after, and the asking of which awkward questions is being discouraged? (Isn't the answer in both cases manifestly "none"?)Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:23 amBecause they look to me like an example of "people looking after their mates and a general hostility towards the asking of awkward questions."JustinHorton wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 9:33 amWhy "extremely", though? How important are they really?
What, specifically, is "demonise" here? What is Ray being accused of that he has not done? Isn't "demonise" a silly term in the circumstances?
I think it is disingenuous to describe the suggestion that there is a group of people who dislike Keene and support each other in criticising him as a strawman. We all know this to be the case, we are only discussing if the method by which it is done is acceptable or not. Or indeed if his presence in the chess world is so malevolent it justifies this approach.
I suspect that much school yard bullying starts as a bit of harmless fun. It is the extent to which the behaviour is continued and how it is done that can transform it into something toxic. We saw upthread some people believe they are being punished without justification.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Nice 74
I don't think "agreeing with people who agree with you" is quite the same thing as "looking after your mate and covering up for them", and you do not think so either.Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 10:57 amI think it is disingenuous to describe the suggestion that there is a group of people who dislike Keene and support each other in criticising him as a strawman.
What is this sinister-sounding "method"?
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Nice 74
I mean we could examine my sinister practice of linking to articles I agree with, or writing true things that other people wish I would not, who knows what kind of dubious activities we might uncover
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 7:37 am
Re: Nice 74
Beyond the well-known Donaldson affair, could Paul Cooksey kindly name one or two cases in which the injured party was compensated for Raymond Keene's plagiarism? Many thanks in advance.Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 7:35 am...I was arguing earlier that GM Keene has been held accountable for his plagiarism. As far as I know in all the cases the injured party was compensated.
O.G. Urcan
-
- Posts: 1523
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: Nice 74
Sinister is an exaggeration of my position that Keenipedia ratings makes me extremely uncomfortable. Neither am I arguing that the people criticising Keene a have done things as bad has he have.
But I am saying that I think the attempt to ostracise GM Keene, and to criticise the people who associate with him for associating with him, beyond anything specific they have done themselves is unjustified.
I don't think I alone in this, since a number of other people have argued that the criticism goes beyond what is reasonable. Most people don't bother trying to argue the point past the "aha, you are defending Keene so must be one of the bad guys" stage. But I'm stubborn and I have a couple of weeks off work during which there are no chess tournaments, so I thought I'd stick with it for now.
But I am saying that I think the attempt to ostracise GM Keene, and to criticise the people who associate with him for associating with him, beyond anything specific they have done themselves is unjustified.
I don't think I alone in this, since a number of other people have argued that the criticism goes beyond what is reasonable. Most people don't bother trying to argue the point past the "aha, you are defending Keene so must be one of the bad guys" stage. But I'm stubborn and I have a couple of weeks off work during which there are no chess tournaments, so I thought I'd stick with it for now.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Nice 74
Well yes, but I should think this is literally true of anything I have ever written in criticism of Ray.Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:22 ama number of other people have argued that the criticism goes beyond what is reasonable
I would scarcely be arguing that there was a cultural problem if I thought you were.
Last edited by JustinHorton on Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:30 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 1523
- Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 4:15 pm
Re: Nice 74
I think the most extensive plagiarism was that of the My Great Predecessors series, which Justin exposed. It is matter of public record that Everyman became aware of it, as did Kasparov himself.O.G. Urcan wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:21 amBeyond the well-known Donaldson affair, could Paul Cooksey kindly name one or two cases in which the injured party was compensated for Raymond Keene's plagiarism? Many thanks in advance. O.G. Urcan
I do not believe they have chosen to make the outcome public. To be honest that isn't a part of chess history that particularly excites me, but perhaps they would respond to a letter.
If you are telling me that you are challenging my position that Keene has been accountable for plagiarism because the injured party has not publicised the outcome, I do not agree.
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Nice 74
Maybe, but:Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:26 amIf you are telling me that you are challenging my position that Keene has been accountable for plagiarism because the injured party has not publicised the outcome, I do not agree.
a. do bear in mind that injured parties include the reader and the purchaser
b. none of the organisations that have dispensed with his services have actually said why they have done so, and for a variety of reasons (some touched on above) this is not desirable.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com