I want you to act on whistle blowing to do with <AJ vs the world> arguments when they are on important player bios and historical games.

I mainly use this website to research chess history.

If you don't act promptly- if at all- on whistle blowing on the chess history pages, your website will get a reputation as a public joke.

You told us to deal with the <AJ v the World> problem by using the whistle blowing function.

I have. I don't make frivolous whistle blows.

I expect you to hold up your end of your own arrangement.

Please clean up <Sultan Khan> page, or let me know the reason why.

Three days to process a whistle blow on <AJ vs. the World> crap is totally unacceptable.

Do you even know why?

Because it's all over your historical game pages and player bios and more on a daily basis.

I have paid a great deal of money to this website over the years- well over a thousand dollars in fact.

I do not expect preferential treatment because of this.

I do expect you to monitor your website properly.

hey guys..stop stalking aj...

why you always visiting his restaurant and issue your unwanted critique.

Please everybody, if you can resist the temptation, just avoid addressing <AJ> at all- at least on famous game pages, such as <Morphy vs. The Opera> and <Steinitz vs. Bardeleben>.

And please avoid arguments with him on Player pages as well.

You thought wrong.

It's funny though: you think that because you are right that you have license to say whatever you feel about the "troop"...which is <you> doing the very thing you accuse the troop of.

I won't deny that <SOME> members of the "troop" go beyond simple critique. But what you and others do is equate the attackers in with the critics, lumping them together.

Indeed you have trodden less than others did...

Victor Pascow: The barrier was not meant to be crossed. The ground is sour.

Kudos to you for having snapped out of the mesmerized state in time...

For the others, constructive critique has has turned into a witch hunt...

Looking for that sniping opportunity at every turn....

But AJ has been tormented so much and so relentlessly that he tends to snap at anyone within range. It may not be a rational thing, but it's a normal response to stress. This is why we see so many posts saying "Jeeze, AJ, I took your side in the past, and now you attack me?"

In an ideal world, the 'opportunists' would step away -- after all, they have no emotional involvement in a flame war. This would leave the core 'troop', the obsessives, more clearly visible. They apparently do have an emotional attachment to flaming AJ.

You can't really blame the man himself. Yes, he lashes out wildly like a cornered animal -- but nobody could tolerate that level of sustained abuse. Rights and wrongs and who-started-its don't matter at all.

Deep down, AJ is just like most of the people who kibitz on CG -- he wants to talk chess and maybe shoot the breeze on other topics that seem relevant, such as anecdotes from his tournament experience. But a few people - not many - think that trying to goad him and hurt him is fun.

It isn't. The first step, as others have suggested, is for the majority to step away from the flames and ignore subsequent temptation.

I'm sure you don't. I don't either. But we should allow for the possibility that other people do, and that these are clogging up the system to some extent.

And we can't ask for *our* very important whistles to be flagged promptly without also asking for the kind of special privileges which you explicitly disavow.

I agree with you, especially the last part that seems to have been forgotten by some.

<jessicafischerqueen: Please everybody, if you can resist the temptation, just avoid addressing <AJ> at all- at least on famous game pages, such as <Morphy vs. The Opera> and <Steinitz vs. Bardeleben>.>

I agree with you also but I think that most of those ones you want to reach won't read that.

One typical case (and I will show you an old one from November 2004): Famous chess game Polugaevsky vs Nezhmetdinov, 1958

<LIFE Master AJ: This game is also unsound - Nezh missed a quicker win.>

This is his whole post, there's no part explaining this further. Considering the implications of this statement (e. g. if you choose forced Nalimov TB win in 35 moves over the one in 34 moves your whole play was unsound), people start protesting.

Someone called <RisingChamp> is protesting against it. For sure, LMAJ starts his deescalation strategy by calling him <Rising idiot> Polugaevsky vs Nezhmetdinov, 1958

For the AJ bashers, it requires that a valid cause of action in the form of a complaint for violation of an offense or a posting guideline violation must be submitted to CG..either done thru the whistle blowing function, a post in the CG members corner or an email to Mr. Freeman.

This has been exercised to the hilt..the problem is any attempt to its resolution ..is not made transparent such that the impression is one of inaction by CG.

Among the issues to be resolved should be:

<Should factual evidence of past misconduct of accused can be admitted at trial for the purpose of inferring that the accused committed the misconduct at issue.>

There is no written decision (coupled with basis thereof) being posted for every complaint and made available for all to see. Hence, no closure.

<LIFE Master AJ: I am just trying to analyze a game ... and maybe win a few new fans in that part of the world. (As for the group that follows me around ... I consider it a form of STALKING. Its wrong and the admins of this site should put a stop to it! BTW, you don't see me following someone around, trying to bash them and bring them down after every single post.)>

with still no action from CG.

<jessicafischerqueen: <twinlark> is rarely, if ever, wrong. Please everybody, if you can resist the temptation, just avoid addressing <AJ> at all- at least on famous game pages, such as <Morphy vs. The Opera> and <Steinitz vs. Bardeleben>.

And please avoid arguments with him on Player pages as well.

If you absolutely must address him with the view to challenge or fight him, at the very least please restrict that to <AJ's> own games pages. There are plenty to choose from.>

But Jess is not as independently placed as <twinlark> so the suggestion may leave much to be desired...

That's the only one that makes any actual sense to me. There's certainly no point trying to drive <AJ> off the website and I'm pretty sure almost everyone wishes the squabbling would stay off Player Bio pages and the pages of important historical games.

To have it on the "Opera game" and the "Bardeleben storms out of the room apocryphal story game" was just really low-rent, made the website look low-rent.

I second JFQ's sentiment. Restraint is called for. Some of these unsavoury posts resemble graffiti smeared inside museums and cathedrals.

However, lately, it seems to be taken to a new level, and follows me everywhere. And - yes, once in a while, I lose my temper and say something inapproriate. Yet I am only human, and I do have my limits. And I am certainly not the only one breaking rules (posting guidelines) here ...

Before I moved in 2007 (I threw out almost all of my old magazines.) ... I put together a long list of references, many in the old "Chess Life" magazine.

I no longer have the mags, but still have lots of books, like "Hastings, 1895." (Centennial Edition) Also, this game is in literally dozens of other books, (One example: The Great Chess Tournaments and their Stories, etc.).

Two important fixes:

#1.) The game was played in Round Ten. (No doubt about this.)

#2.) The last move of the game was 25.RxP/h7+!.

One of the posts on the W So vs Shirov, 2011 page is beyond the Pale. A nasty post from a nasty kibitzer. Please clean up that page, and feel free to delete my latest post on that page as well.