13 Jan 06
Originally posted by StarrmanI would say that if we do not RHP loses the opportunity to be the first to promote a women's championship, and perhaps if it becomes an annual event to attract more female players to the site. I'm not sure who is losing anything by allowing the championship to proeceed inhindered? the site championship is not at all diminished by an equivelent event for the women, did you enter the site championship?
I don't pay to use the British Women's Chess Championship. I disagree that there should be a seperation between sexes and I think that everyone loses if we continue to do so.
13 Jan 06
Originally posted by stevetoddYes, I generally do enter the annual site ones.
I would say that if we do not RHP loses the opportunity to be the first to promote a women's championship, and perhaps if it becomes an annual event to attract more female players to the site. I'm not sure who is losing anything by allowing the championship to proeceed inhindered? the site championship is not at all diminished by an equivelent event for the women, did you enter the site championship?
I think positive discrimination just drives a wedge between people, it doesn't make any advances in equality, it just confirms that there needs to be different groupings because the two groups cannot compete together and this is plainly rubbish. How RHP or chess as a whole benefit from this segregation?
13 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by StarrmanI too disagree with positive discrimination when it is applied in circumstances such as selection of candidates i.e. in employment where there are a limited number of positions available, therefore someone more deserving will lose out due to the discrimination. However this is not the case here, there are plenty of tournaments available to enter and of course the open site championship (which I gather by your wording 'I usually do enter' means that in fact you did not?). I think that this should be put to a vote, the site is presumably run for the subscribers to use and enjoy and perhaps they collectively should decide, it may be that the vote would be in favour of not proceeding with the tournament which I personally would not agree with, but would reluctantly accept.
Yes, I generally do enter the annual site ones.
I think positive discrimination just drives a wedge between people, it doesn't make any advances in equality, it just confirms that there needs to be different groupings because the two groups cannot compete together and this is plainly rubbish. How RHP or chess as a whole benefit from this segregation?
13 Jan 06
Originally posted by stevetoddYou gather correctly, though I fail to see what it has to do with our discussion.
I too disagree with positive discrimination when it is applied in circumstances such as selection of candidates i.e. in employment where there are a limited number of positions available, therefore someone more deserving will lose out due to the discrimination. However this is not the case here, there are plenty of tournaments available to enter and of co ...[text shortened]... ing with the tournament which I personally would not agree with, but would reluctantly accept.
IMO, positive discrimination is wrong in whichever aspect of its application you care to consider. The arena in which it appears does not justify its use.
If Russ made a decision (and even if this was following a vote) to the contrary, I would have to abide by it. Until then I have the right to enter this tournament.
13 Jan 06
Originally posted by StarrmanWell it seems as if Russ may have to make a decision then
You gather correctly, though I fail to see what it has to do with our discussion.
IMO, positive discrimination is wrong in whichever aspect of its application you care to consider. The arena in which it appears does not justify its use.
If Russ made a decision (and even if this was following a vote) to the contrary, I would have to abide by it. Until then I have the right to enter this tournament.
13 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by StarrmanAs indeed I do, however I have made my point (not for my benefit but for the benefit of others and the site in general) and you yours, so I am happy to let the democratic process decide if called upon. It appears obvious that we are not going to convince each other, however I would say that it is possible for 2 people to agree to disagree and you seem that sort (i.e. you did not resort to personal insults as many do here). I have no doubt that you believe in what you are saying as I do, maybe we can discuss it in person over a beer if there is a london meet up again (I could no make the last one).
I'm not even sure that's true, I wouldn't be surprised if he had far more important things to do.
13 Jan 06
Ok, pretty good. Eight pages of crap.
First of all, this was never touted as a Women's Championship. In fact, I'd rather it not be. This was just supposed to be a fun little tourney for the girls, and Arrakis was kind enough to think of it and sponsor it and even cough up the dough for a t-shirt for it. Something fun, just for us.
But nooooo... the misogynistic testosterone crowd has to raise a stink. Not just any stink, but an indignant, idealistic stink. With a side order of righteous justification.
What's wrong with you guys? This could become a nice tradition, this tournament just for us, if only you'd let it happen. We could have it every January, and it would be nice that we have one tournament where the men voluntarily stepped aside and let the girls play. It's one stinkin' tournament a year. Why, oh why, get your panties in *such* a bunch over it? Does the idea really offend you that much? Or is it just a case of "look at ME, dammit! NO, look at ME!"
How can you possibly be against the idea? Nobody believes that even you believe that drivel about sexism in the first place. Why is this SUCH an affront to your masculinity? Are you somehow afraid to let us have one stinkin' tournament to ourselves? I realize that women are a small minority here, but why does this necessitate dissing us like this?
You have an opportunity here to be a real man and show the women of RHP some respect and voluntarily refrain from interferring with their tournament. If this is really too outrageous of an idea for you guys, then I would vote to cancel the tournament on the grounds that the men can't act like grown-ups for at least one tournament. Maybe someday they will, but that day doesn't seem to be today. But I'd be delighted to be proven wrong just this once...
13 Jan 06
Originally posted by stevetoddI'd like that very much 🙂
As indeed I do, however I have made my point (not for my benefit but for the benefit of others and the site in general) and you yours, so I am happy to let the democratic process decide if called upon. It appears obvious that we are not going to convince each other, however I would say that it is possible for 2 people to agree to disagree and you seem tha ...[text shortened]... cuss it in person over a beer if there is a london meet up again (I could no make the last one).
13 Jan 06
Originally posted by SuzianneCalm down Suzianne. You confuse me, you know? You go through the forums with an overtly feminist attitude and then when you come into a situation like this, where positive discrimination is occuring (something you should surely be against), you revert to wanting your specialist female group. I don't get it, do you want to be specialised? Doesn't that make those feminist values somewhat undermined?
Ok, pretty good. Eight pages of crap.
First of all, this was never touted as a Women's Championship. In fact, I'd rather it not be. This was just supposed to be a fun little tourney for the girls, and Arrakis was kind enough to think of it and sponsor it and even cough up the dough for a t-shirt for it. Something fun, just for us.
But nooooo... the ...[text shortened]... doesn't seem to be today. But I'd be delighted to be proven wrong just this once...
13 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by SuzianneGood post, Suzianne!
Ok, pretty good. Eight pages of crap.
First of all, this was never touted as a Women's Championship. In fact, I'd rather it not be. This was just supposed to be a fun little tourney for the girls, and Arrakis was kind enough to think of it and sponsor it and even cough up the dough for a t-shirt for it. Something fun, just for us.
But nooooo... the doesn't seem to be today. But I'd be delighted to be proven wrong just this once...
You are right, it's not the Ladies Championship, just a simple little tournament for the girls (which I had thought about doing on an annual basis).
When the guys started joining in I went to Russ about the problem, but he explained to me that he couldn't take the time to determine the gender of people for a tournament. I understand that. It's pretty obvious to me that such a tournament must be entrusted to the player's honor. A couple of guys have dishonorably entered the tournament... hence there won't be another one - not by me anyway.
One other point. I'm not going to cause Russ any grief by refusing to give the t-shirt to the 1st place winner. 1st place will win the t-shirt, but it will have insignia on it saying "1st Ladies Open". 😀
13 Jan 06
1 edit
Originally posted by StarrmanSo, where was all your indignation when the " All Dutch" only tourney was created. Hmmmm?? It appears to me that you are selectively discriminatory in your 'anti-discrimination' protests, which in fact makes you a hypocrit.
Right? Says who? This isn't about what kind of person I am outside the topic. I am utterly against positive discrimination and I always have been. I am also against skeeter's threat tactics, they're out of line.
As to Xanth, he gets what he deserves. Russ has no control and no re-dress over what I publish on another site. Xanth practically dared me to release his personal data and I'm going to oblige. He knows what he has to do to to prevent this. It's got nothing to do with morals.
skeeter