And i've been aching to ask you what you think of Gizmo as your new nickname?

Most people won´t understand what that is supposed to mean, so let me explain it to you: The thing is that user <tpstar> has this idea that "Carlsen fans" think Americans are stupid, and he will miss no opportunity to talk about that idea. Hence, user <tpstar> thinks that the Game Of The Day and the Best Games of 2012 are suitable opportunities to let everyone know about this intriguing idea of his, and at the same time to make "subtle" attacks one of his favourite foes here on chessgames.com >

well, there are certain kibitzers who are fanboys - they are kind of attached to their chess hero.

bureaucrat is one of them.

whereas , tpstar , as passionate abour chess as he is, is not attached to any chess supergm's success or failure apparently. and tpstar does comment on this juvenile attachment of fanboys at times. which some people see as attack.

an evolutionary gap :)

ok, suggest some other term of your liking which conveyts the same meaning for such people - people who are attached to the success and failure of one's celebrity hero.

truth is not always nice.

you know that (by now oft repeated) instance when restwhile fanboy zarg called angslo obsessive, compulsive.

was that nice? may be not? was that true? yes. and by embracing the truth angslo evolved.

and zarg himself is no longer a fanboy these days. is that a coincidence? perhaps not :)

and even those carlsen fanboys who lied so unabahedly and were so unrepentent after getting caught, have evolved in many ways . perhaps, they will own up their lies too one day :)

I remember <angslo> very well, as we had several illuminating interactions over the years. He deserves a tremendous amount of sympathy for being repeatedly attacked and bullied over and over again on an Internet player page, but he kept proving his mettle by standing up to their attacking and their bullying. Ultimately the pressure became too much and he left us in September 2011, which was unfortunate except the Administrators could not afford to spend any more time on an unresolvable conflict.

Most of his issues were with one particular member of the group who earned a terrible reputation as an unrepentant rulebreaker. If that user would've had 10% of my will and determination to find a way to peacefully coexist with people one disagrees (heavily) with, he and I would've been talking long ago. but he has made up his mind, he's willing to gamble his entire reputation here on it, and he wants to force his view and verdict on everyone here - no matter what it takes. He continues, and will continue, until he sees me bend and break - or somehow end up conforming to his view(s) of how we should behave. Would you believe this same person just cyberstalked my chessforum yesterday, except he tried to delete some of his posts to destroy the evidence. Too late.

Next time you see <angslo>, please ask if he knows any of his former adversaries by identity. Believe me, he will know exactly what I mean. I am working on a very interesting writing project about a cult and a hate group, with the curious phenomenon how some people believe their anonymity on the Internet allows them to violate Posting Guidelines and social norms without any penalty. My specific interest is analyzing otherwise decent people who will let a comment like "why do you go to great lengths in order to show that <you> are a stupid american? a stupid, hypocritical, lying one, even" just pass them by without even noticing, while trying to turn a cutesy-poo term like "Fanboy" into some horrible pejorative slur, indicating they have lost all human perspective. I could really use his help matching up the specific quotes with their specific origin, and everything we need happens to be right here on this site.

Have you seen some of his recent posts??

that is sad.

but even if this user has made up his mind, he can change his decision in future. i am optimistic .

<tpstar: If that user would've had 10% of my will and determination to find a way to peacefully coexist with people one disagrees (heavily) with, he and I would've been talking long ago.>

Just so we are clear, those two sentences starting with "10%" and up to "behave" are what he wrote about me before. Then the part about cyberstalking reverses the roles again, since he really did cyberstalk my chessforum the other day. What do you call someone who knows the rules yet breaks them anyway?

<angslo> and I are the only ones outside the Guardians of Truth to remember the smear campaign, and who was involved, and who was targeted. We aren't supposed to reminisce on the Carlsen page since Don't Look Back rules the day, but those two users are gone and probably left. Time will tell who will be next.

<he can change his decision in the future> Based on past behavior, that is highly unlikely.

well, i have potential, at least :)

and intend to actualize that potential (abrahm maslow's 'self-actualized ' kind of evolution) :)

<Take care. =) >

Quiz: Exactly who in world history did Abraham Maslow regard as having attained "self-actualization"?

a) Jesus Christ
b) Abraham Maslow
c) Abraham Maslow's aunt
d) anyone else ever
e) a, b and c only
>

a)

i think at any time , Maslow reckoned, around 5% of the human population is self-actualised.

and Jesus is self-actualized but that does not mean one is self-actualized only if one is at the level of Jesus.

in simple terms (at the risk of being simplistic) being self-actualized means being free from fears and needs so that one's motivations are inspirational and selfless. at this level, one knows experientially that one's basic needs will always be taken care of automatically if one is free from psychological insecurities and if one's actions are directed towards common good

and one is always full of joy from within at this level (joy that comes from within and is independent of outer circumstances)

and even if one reaches this level , there are higher stages of inner/spiritual evolution - jesus being at one of the highest of the stages. and St Francis also at a very high stage.

but one does not need to renounce material world and be a monk/nun to be self-actualized either. in fact, one can be very rich, handsome , healthy, socially powerful and sexually very active and still be self-actualized

He began by picking out a group of people, some historical figures, some people he knew, whom he felt clearly met the standard of self-actualization. Included in this august group were Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, Eleanor Roosevelt, Jane Adams, William James, Albert Schweitzer, Benedict Spinoza, and Alduous Huxley, plus 12 unnamed people who were alive at the time Maslow did his research. He then looked at their biographies, writings, the acts and words of those he knew personally, and so on. From these sources, he developed a list of qualities that seemed characteristic of these people, as opposed to the great mass of us. ">