Ha! Your very own <george wallace> doesn't even have a premium membership.>

<George Wallace> is a progressive liberal. Have you read his profile page?

But I'll even buy him a premium membership for the next lib that leaves because his ultimatum to <Susan> wasn't met re the guidelines.

Now <Susan> wants us to follow the advice of an effete academic from Harvard - the bastion of East-Coast liberals?

Did I hurt somebody's little feelings?

Truth-graped!? Or grated by the truth.

CG is dead until it gets bought by a third party.>

stonehenge chessforum

Susan - you need to go, now.

If you say you want to lynch somebody
or shoot the President, it should be deleted.
Shouting fire in the www does not apply,>

Isn't it sad that you have to spell out commonsense like this and spoon feed it to a bunch of grown men?

Anyways - I offer my services as the moderator. Warning: I will not take much action, but if someone threatens to shoot up a school, I'll delete the post and suspend them for a couple days.

How about reposting the ChristChurch murderer's manifesto (under the rather thin guise of "analysis")?

How about posting the Iliad, or some other cut-and-paste job, on the Cafe to flood the forum?

All good examples of free speech on <CG>, at least in this version of the multi-verse,

Makes me want to say the c-word - i.e. clueless.

One can be principled, sure, or would it be more apt to say Peter Principled?

Free speech is precious and should be protected for a functional democracy. This means speech must be protected from the government. Chessgames.com can limit speech as much as they choose because it is their site to do with as they please. They are not the US government and their censorship is not a violation of anyone's rights. None of us has been forced to be here, we choose to be.

Dead wrong.

Just consider how the libs, like ANTIFA and BLM, block the highways (which prevent ambulances and emergency vehicles from getting through) and have the nerve to call that free speech.

Or how about the <Free Speech>, as it was characterized, of the 300+ "peaceful protests" that burned American cities from coast to coast, got people killed, police stations set on fire, entire downtown sections of big cities smashed and looted - and that was how the libs celebrate <free speech>.

So no, people on the chess website who have political views different than your own are <not> doing <anything> more dangerous than what happens in the real world.

You mean when <Keypusher> told <GW> to put a gun in his mouth and pull the trigger?

Or do you mean <al wazir> when he called for putting Christians in concentration camps?

When <al wazir> called for the torture and murder of people who support Trump, including those on the Rogoff page?

Yeah, I didn't see you upset about any of that.

Cry me a river, <Zanzibar>. Nobody feels bad for you.

I am in favor of greater moderation and stricter guidelines to foster inclusivity and sensitivity among all members. In my absence I see that white supremacists have infiltrated this site and feel comfortable making their racist, violent views public with little fear of consequences. It's repugnant and completely counteractive to a site that would purport to be welcoming to a global public interested in chess and sharing that interest freely with others. My sincere hope is that the difficult but necessary steps are taken to improve the public forum on this site to continue what has been (until recently) a great space for research and discussion about chess and its history.>

<Big Pawn: Obviously. It's way out of control. How did it get like this again?>>

The buck stops at the top.

You would never even know because it would be between me and <Susan> via email.

I'm the only reasonable person to put in that position. For one, I don't wear a pink pussyhat.

So far, all the libs have abused their position as administrators or mods.

Now it's <my> turn, and like Trump, who moved the embassy to Jerusalem in support of the only democracy in the Middle East, I would do a good job and not get any credit for it.

Congrats, I just barfed on myself.

Notice the code words in there?

"Inclusivity"
"Sensitivity"

What about inclusivity toward me? What about the "diversity" I bring to this party, where otherwise everyone would be singing the same tune (practically)?

What about not posting provocative leftist drivel out of your "sensitivity" to more conservative posters?

What about not trashing Russia and Russians over the Ukraine war, out of sensitivity to the Russians on this site, and those whose sympathy lie with them?

Oh, I get it. You don't really mean "inclusivity" and "sensitivity". That's just lib-speak for, "Get in line, bend the knee, and be politically correct."

It's not Drag Queen Story Hour either.

You libs don't get to make the rules, force everyone to use your words, force everyone to not say other words, force everyone to think and talk your way.

Bulljive.

Nothing said on this website is as dangerous as an ANTIFA protest shutting down traffic on the freeway, which stops emergency vehicles from getting through, and people who need urgent care dying.

A PhD in English? Okay, great. Go read Romeo and Juliet and teach the kids in class what Shakespeare was trying to say.

But that's where your extremely narrow field of expertise ends. Don't come here and say that non-liberal opinions are more <dangerous> than in the real world.

I am close to erasing this entire, bloated topic.

stonehenge chessforum>