Thursday, January 27, 2011

More Noise and Gibberish

The issue of a fair selection has been dwelled upon ever since I started playing chess more than 20 years ago.

Who is fighting against a fair selection? I wrote a proposal for a fair selection here.

I then repeated it here.

The vile and poisonous snake that Raymond Siew is trying to sway you into believing that the people who are against his stupidity is actually against fair selection. We have always proposed a fair selection. Even Rationality has always been in full support of a fair selection. His criticism of the current way of the MCF selection is here.

This all started when Raymond proposed a Junior vs Senior event (or some other parent proposed to him) which serves no purpose at all except to prove a useless point. Then when he realized that no one really cares for that, he switched camps and started shouting about a fair selection  and discarded the "Junior vs Senior" shout when that was what Rationality and I were talking about. He just decided to start shouting so that he would be counted, or thought to be relevant. Who is detracting from the real issue?

Raymond is fighting an imaginary invisble demon. Good luck with that. I hope that he wins. No one has spoken against a fair selection. He created this imaginary demon who is against fair selection and has started to throw stones at it. Oh wait, the MCF is against fair selection (for now). No one is even detracting from the real issue but Raymond himself. Do you see his cheap tricks? He tries to discredit every other person not in agreement with him and then tries to steal their ideas.

The best part is, he is very sneaky. He quotes an imaginary IT guy (OK, maybe he is real), and says that the poll CAN be fixed. But of course, he is so sneaky that he doesn't specifically spell it out that I have fixed the poll. Do you notice that?

He just suggests and implies and twists and twists so that you THINK I fixed the poll. So you see, he doesn't specifically claim that I am cheating, or else he may be liable for libel. Because in this way, he does not have to prove that I have cheated. Just to let you think that I did. Wow... you cannot believe the vile of this poisonous snake.

Wait, he does not stop there. Now, he wants you to believe that because polls can be fixed, I am against fair selections. Did you just do a double-take there? Yes!! He tried to make you believe that because the poll has the possibility of being rigged, therefore I am against fair selection.

The poll asked if Raymond had a case against some group of bloggers. It had nothing to do with the selection at all. This is how powerful Raymond's uncanny ability of "joining the dots". He can join the dots from the possibility of rigging a poll to other people trying to distract you from a fair selection.

Yes, we all know you want to feel special, Raymond. I am sorry for you. There is no "one person" who is so free to pretend that he is many people and trying to go against you.

In actual fact, it really is the case that the whole world is out to get you. Because you and your deviousness know it. One person can sign up for many fake accounts with names and start making comments. Will that be your next excuse when people start to comment with their real names?

Stop being so conceited and wake up. The world is out to get you.


  1. Yes you see thru him too. hope everyone does eventually

  2. Yeah its ok if he's just dumb or manipulative, but I think he has this devisive and destructive streak that's a concern to the chess fraternity.

    The Challenger

  3. He needs a Pancho to clean up his illusion. Will this chess player and seemingly independent-minded blogger like Ilham bite Ramon's carefully laced baits?

    The Challenger

  4. What's the matter with this Raymond, so worked up that he wants to shoot everybody in town and now crossing over south of the border.

  5. He's a man with all the negative traits of Peter Long but none of the good ones.

  6. He thinks he's the only clever one and wants to educate the backward chess community his inner child gibberish. But neither is he known in corporate world, except maybe bridge or poker kaki.

  7. Now Raymond Siew has begun to delete comments even slightly going against his way of thinking. He wanted people to post under names other than "anonymous". I did and he deleted it. He even deleted some past comments posted before he decided to ban. He only wants comments supporting him. No wonder there are so few comments nowadays. Judge for yourself. Next time he should say only supporters can post.

  8. Maybe he is starting to talk to himself only.

  9. Indeed he is trying to hypnotise himself into believing the whole world is against him. Listen to him and you feel out of this world, the real world.

  10. He wants people with names to post. Not any random name i.e. use your real name or perish. LOL...

    I may even start a column here for people to leave comments for his blog. Just to get some kick out of it :P

  11. Siew Fai, it seems your 'knowledge' of the situation in Perak chess all come from fgm writings. In other words, I conclude that you know next to nothing about the chess situation in Perak. So just stop showing your ignorance with your comments (in Jimmy's blog on Perak chess.

    FYI, there is no dispute or warring factions in Perak chess. The PICA/PCNP committee is doing a pretty reasonable job currently and has the full support of the general chess community in Perak. Also, fgm has been a non-entity in Perak chess circle for 1.5 years now. Prior to that, he was generally seen as a disruptive influence.

    Your writings seems to promote fgm perspectives and thus assisting (inadvertently or not, you tell me) fgm in his attempt to systematically destroy tht good image of Perak chess.

    So please refrain from writing further nonsense about Perak chess in ignorance.

    Perak boy

    P/S Chess Ninja, I hope you don't mind me borrowing your blog for this comment. I could not post this in Jimmy's blog as his settings do not allow anonymous postings. Cheers.

  12. Dear Perak Boy,

    Thank you for reading the surface so well. I also wish you do understand “Moral Hazard” and “Moral Obligation” when sponsorships are involved. Since OCT10, I needed a quick feel on the perception that was abounding about Perak chess and as you may have noted, I had “skimed info from the web” thus “hearing voices of those that shout the loudest”. Amazingly, after three months, you are the first in giving me “the other perspective”. Never ever under estimate perception, be it true or not, it can overwhelm the real issue. As you had rightly said it, it can systematically destroy and in the worst scenario, obliterate rapidly the good deeds created by the passionate.

    You would have thought in today’s world, meeting up with any of the personalities involved would be just a phone call away. I had resisted the temptation to make direct contact for the mere reason of not getting into any entanglement that would derail the sponsor’s objectives. Any charge of “collusion” with any of the chess personality will compromise the program. I had chosen neutrality and arms length by not meeting and knowing any one of them. In other words, regardless of whatever Raymond had implied, the program (if green light given) will most probably includes Perak (Sadly, I have no say in this!)

    Moving forward, perhaps, you too will share the same stage with me. Imagine (not the fear type!) you receive the cheque that is handed to you. Imagine the broad smile on my face and the happiness I feel for you. They are genuine and carry no negative connotation as that of “where is my share of the monies”. Just imagine hard and you know why neutrality I espoused is the Key Success Factor to the whole program.

    Note 1: An inclusive event is by far easier to run than an exclusive event.

    Note 2: A sponsored event is much simpler than a partnership event.

    Note 3: Although I had asked you “to imagine you are invited” into this exclusive event, you may be heart broken when the (“deemed capable”) invitation list is released and your name is not in it. Not knowing who you are, I can only wish you luck. Oh yes, careless of me for not mentioning earlier, each legs, it is winner takes it all.

    Powerful question: Why are there sponsors looking into me to do something for chess in Malaysia? I am not a Malaysian rated or Fide rated player nor am I in any of the “public domain” chess committees?

    The answer is I teaches chess on a volunteered basis and had pledged that I will not earn a single cent from chess as long as I am gainfully employed in my profession. I am very specific in my precondition that no money passes through my hands.

    Now that I have somebody speak out on”the other perspective” and may have made my posting inaccurate (benefit of the doubts to you, Perak Boy), there is no longer any need to simultaneously post my “today’s writing” into this and beyond 64 blog (After all, Chess is Chess had kept it and Raymond had deleted).

    Best of regards/Lee

  13. Not another Lunatic

  14. Problem is these lunatics are getting disproportinate attention from MCF Greg. Bad precedent and time wasting

  15. Yesterday, I deleted a comment for the first time ever. As I mentioned before, I will not stand for vulgarities, censored or otherwise.

    This blog was not created with hate. So I am not going to be personal about this. I disagree with the point that they are getting disproportionate attention from Greg. Greg has no one else to talk to because half of the people who have anything concrete to contribute do not care, and the other half are anonymous.

    If we descend to personality attacks, then we only bring ourselves to Raymond's gutter talk. No need for that. Hopefully we can all present facts and those will speak for themselves.

  16. "half of the people who have anything concrete to contribute do not care, and the other half are anonymous."

    agree with this

  17. Yah!! The anonymous half include me and TheChess Ninja. Sorry, I suppose Jimmy is in the do not care half (or has nothing to contribute). Go figure.

  18. Appreciate the humor. I was rounding up :)