Author: Shaun Graham
Date: 00:38:28 09/30/98
Go up one level in this thread
>> An Offense was comitted on CCC by Robert Hyatt, against one of the members of >>CCC. That member being me Shaun Graham. Because this offense occurred in this >>open form, I am discussing it in this open form, because the CONDUCT OF MEMBERS >>IN CCC, IS AN INHERENTLY ON TOPIC SUBJECT of CCC, when that conduct occurs >>inside of this forum. This is especially true, for the reason that if a slight >>is comitted against a CCC member in open forum damaging his/her reputation and >>standing in the group there is no recourse for the individual to defend >>him/herself in order to dispell falsehoods and rebuke unwarranted attacks that >>may exist in the collective consciousness of the group. Except by making a >>statement in the group. This is true, for the reason that even though one could >>write to the moderators, since no statement is released by the moderators, the >>damage to ones reputation MAY remain fixed. >> >>I posted a thread in this group which stated: >> >>1. Robert Hyatt is a liar. >> >> This Statement was posted for the reason that IN WRITING Robert Hyatt AGREED >>to cease and desist from reading or posting replies to posts of Shaun Graham. >>At least on two occasions Robert Hyatt has willfully and intentionally broken >>this WRITTEN AGREEMENT, by posting replies to posts of Shaun Graham. Further >>this more direct statement of the facts was only made, after Robert Hyatt was >>informed by me to maintain his agreement after he violated it the first time. >>This agreement was made and accepted by both parties because of irreconcilable >>differences of oppinions leading to long unnecessary heated debates that occur >>between the two parties. >> >>This statement against Robert Hyatt is not an attack or an abuse of him. For >>the reason that an attack is something most often which is "derogatory, and >>simultaneously of the nature of OPPINION, and SOMETIMES also for the soul >>purpose to defame the person who is targeted". Here the statement is 1.NOT of >>OPPINION, for the reason that the agreement is in writing and stored in a post >>of CCC, and further that the evidence that Hyatt has been reading and posting to >>Shaun Graham's posts, is also a part of CCC record. 2.There is no effort being >>made to defame Robert Hyatt by the statement, but only to defend myself from his >>abuse(He broke the agreement, and he was posting written faulty sarcastic >>attacks to the posts in question). 3. Thus if Hyatt is defamed and if the truth >>about him(he lied) is derogatory, that is a by-product that has occured. It >>would have not even been possible for this to have occurred except for the >>reason that he violated the agreement(lied). >> >>Hyatt attempted to justify his breaking of this agreement(his lying), by making >>the claim that a post by Shaun Graham entitled "Fritz draws a game with Anand, >>and Junior defeats Zifroni in a match", that contained the line "Hmm looks like >>GM strength to me", was SOMEHOW directed at him. Considering that I have had >>no contact with Hyatt or even read a post of his in over a month, not to mention >>that the posts doesn't mention him at all, such a claim can be seen for the "Red >>Herring it is(an attempt to cover his lie). The post was only meant to inspire >>some comment about these matches, especially since there wasn't much response to >>the more direct post i made which asked if anyone had info on the "Zifroni >>match?" Further if i am not mistaken this post was written AFTER Hyatt broke >>the agreement the first time. So again he has no justification for breaking his >>WRITTEN AGREEMENT. >> >>Robert Hyatt has broken the conduct of CCC more than any other person in the >>history of this group(IMHO), he is constantly arguing against "trolls" but one >>can notice, that he "trolls" EVERYTHING(not occasionaly, but all the time) that >>he thinks is a troll! This statement is made on the good evidence of the record >>of CCC postings which is available to be viewed. I am not claiming that the >>moderators of this group are unfairly overlooking this behavior of Hyatt, but it >>would surprise me a bit, if anyone else would be allowed to go around refferring >>to CCC members as "nut cases"(a recent posting of Robert Hyatt). Further posts >>supporting Hyatt such as >> >> "Right. If the bums post off-topic shit, erase them! >>Then erase the bums, we dont want them. We dont want their off-topic shit. What >>do they think this place is rec.games.chess.computer? Throw them off. Thats what >>our moderators are for. Great guys. Show them what is >>what We want on-topic only. When do those bums get it in their stupid heads? >>Bob is a great guy too."(Jay Rinde) >> >>Are often(IMHO) allowed to take up residence here on CCC without retort. This >>is not to say that i am not thankful for the time and effort that moderators put >>into this group because i am. I do however think that Robert Hyatt, mainly >>because he has written a free chess program, gets preferential treatment, though >>perhaps unintentionally so. Sorry for this aside >> >>The point is Robert Hyatt 1.blatantly "LIED" in this group, 2.attacked a member >>of CCC 3.attempted to use some influence to cover up his behavior. > > >I didn't attack anything. I pointed out that *your* post was *not* >related to computer chess, and that this is *not* a political forum for >you to vent your political nonsense in. This is a computer chess message >board, hence the name "computer chess club" and not "political ideology >supporting something". Indeed you did attack, you were attempting to use sarcasm about me and a post i wrote. Further the post i wrote was only a RESPONSE to someone who was writing about politics. In my post, all i said to them was that i hope that they write against republicans every chance they get, but in a polite way i told them that this was not the forum for it. This is obvious because i said in the post reffering to writing about the subject "you probably can't do it here". Even more you weren't trying to write anything about trolling, like you want to claim, you just wanted to make some statement to me and my post(which you shouldn't have even known what it said, because you weren't supposed to be reading it!), for the reason that at the end you write "Robert Hyatt a Republican". There was no reason for you to put that you were a republican. Further there was no need for you to reply, as for what you said had nothing to do with computer chess and you being a republican has nothing to do woth computer chess either. My reply to the parent post it too had nothing to do with computer chess, except that i was telling him that he probably couldn't post about that subject here. Your post was only about harrasment. Shaun > >You also are capable of "trolls" which is fine, but expect a bite from >time to time. We had a long argument about whether Fritz was a GM, or >could earn a GM title. that discussion ended. A few weeks later the >one-liner "looks like GM performance to me" was an obvious troll directed >at the old thread, whether you want to admit it or not. Because no one >else argued with you about the issue. So you trolled, you got a bite, and >then you whine? You are full of it and you know it, you think you were the only person arguing on that side? Since you WERE NOT the only person writing on the side of "Fritz isn't a GM", there is no way possible that you can logically reason to a conclusion that such a statement was aimed directly at you. Further, even if it was(which it wasn't) as YOU put it"directed at the old thread"(R hyatt, above) aimed at the old thread has nothing to do with aimed at YOU. Especially considering that if it had been aimed at the old thread(which it wasn't) since lots of people read and replied to the old thread(consdiering it was probably 200 posts long), then it meant it would have been aimed at the ccc membership, again nothing aimed at you, especially as mentioned before because you weren't supposed to be reading my posts! > > > >> >>I want one thing and one thing only, that is for Robert Hyatt to be forced to >>maintain the WRITTEN agreement he made here on CCC, because his not doing so is >>counter productive to the goals and aims of CCC. > > >Moderators aren't going to force me to maintain any written agreement, >other than to follow the charter of this newsgroup and discuss computer >chess. If you follow that, there won't be a problem, either. Robert Hyatt i am pleased that you further defame yourself by boldly stating above that you don't follow your word. You are right about there wont be a problem, because if there is i'll be causing you one, not the other way around like you attempt to state above. > > > > >> >>Thank you for your time >> >>Sincerely Shaun Graham >> >> >>P.S. Hyatt also attempted to try to make a claim that i am somehow related to >>the banned CCC member Sean Evans for the purpose of drawing attention away from >>his behavior. The USCF has a record of my location being Oklahoma. There is >>also a record of a Shawn Evans located in Ohio(I assume the evans in question), >>Further i am quite certain that the postings bye me and Sean Evans can be >>demonstrated to have quite different sources of origination. I have no relation >>whatsoever to Sean Evans. > > > >Actually, "Sean" claimed that in r.g.c.c, but you do write just like him, >at times... > >Personally, I don't care what you write, just so it is related to computer >chess. Political statements are *not*. However, origination in one state >doesn't mean someone lives there, *only* that their ISP is doing business >there... Apparently you are lying again, because obvioulsy you do care about what i write whatever i write. This because since YOU ARE NOT A CCC POLICE OR MODERATOR, you have no reason to be looking at my posts to see what they contain, especially since in WRITING you have already said you would stop. Further stop this bull crap about me being Sean Evans. It's ridiculous considering that before he was banned, the two accounts existed simultaneously, and there are probably posts of him replying to me, or vice versa which would be one person replying to themselves. Further as pointed out, the USCF can confirm locations. Another point i'm sure their are real people in the chess groups who know Sean Evans in Real Life, and there are people in the groups who know me in real life, that can confirm we do not live in the same state. Further you are just continuing this ridiculous arguemnt because i busted you in an earlier posts for using false accounts to support yourself and attack people who had views contrary to your own.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.