Coronavirus

sodacat11

spidersweb wrote: »

Not so, Greece is one of the very safest countries in the world actually. Which is why on Monday when government announcements are made I expect that Greece will be one of the special cases for a "bridge" as they are calling it.



Will you acknowledge this on Monday then?


I will take note of the situation on Monday and make travel plans after not before then.

I thought that the Government was advising against all non essential travel? Greece may very well be safer than many other countries but it is likely have a lot of tourists from other countries which aren't. I am not convinced either about the safety of air travel regardless of what Michael O'Leary might say. Anyway I guess this is more a discussion for the "Coronavirus"thread than here.

spidersweb

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

.......

Thanks for taking the time to reply. That is very much appreciated. Unfortunately though,and sorry to say it but, there are things that I would dispute and find unsatisfactory in what, at times, were very selective responses.

A glaring example of this would the response to this:
To cap it all all off, and as as if to underscore the impression of a certain contempt or utter indifference to all the participants there are no details about the prizes. Aside from a reference to a prize fund of 4000, There is no information about 1st,2nd, 3rd (4th 5th?) or about Grading prizes, if there are any, and if so, what are they.
There is a flyer. https://www.icu.ie/system/events/fly...pdf?1594466211

Which frankly is tantamount to something along the lines of perhaps. Go away and look at this, here is a link- end of story. (Except that it is far from the end of the story)
A more useful (fair) honest and maybe appropriate response might be something along the lines of:
Yeah that is a good point, thanks for highlighting this. We slipped up there. There really should have been details of the prizes as you mentioned them. We only put this link up very recently (maybe in response to this comment- maybe just a coincidence) and actually there are no further details about the prizes except the first prize is now listed, none others are, still, but they will be.
Which begs the question why not now? Again this is a national championships for goodness sake. So much good and hard work is done by the ICU and yourself, why not take care of such a detail, when not doing so looks so poor? Try explaining to a non chess player that you don’t know what the prizes are for an Irish ch? They laugh at you or are just incredulous.
What is incredibly telling is the fact that not one single person on here picked up and or made any comment on this at all. Nothing! So fair play to you for noticing and at least acknowledging this.
Still, don’t get me wrong, there is much that is very informative and helpful from your responses, but for fear of wasting your time and attention, I would rather focus onn a few specifics at this time (a mention of other stuff maybe later- just for the purposes of clarification) and I would just like to offer a suggestion or make a request.

How about we take a step back and being mindful of the fact that we all accept that the overwhelming number of changes for the 2020 Irish ch, while not welcome, in of themselves, or conducive to more rather than less enjoyment or just satisfaction , for the players, are nevertheless needed to insure good practice in the circumstances we are living in with this “pandemic”.



Full credit is given to the ICU and all those behind the scenes trying their best to have the event go ahead with as little disruption or distortion as is possible under very difficult circumstances, but perhaps we can all just do even better?

Two issues only have been identified out of all this and while all the changes and special measures have been presented as a whole package, these two specifics could, and I clearly contend should be dealt with on their own.

1 The two boards option V one board option.
2 The wearing of masks with no option for the players.

According to yourself it seems that in the case of 1 there are actually very few who will opt for the two board choice, but some will, and they will have to make that choice from the start and for the duration of the tournament.

Thus, as you correctly point out, greatly diminishing the chance of anyone trying to “game the system”, though not completely in the sense that if a player knows any other participant is willing to not play them and in advance of the event tells people this publicly someone might decide to choose this option in the hope of maybe picking up a free point here or there maybe?

Seems very unlikely that we will have such a scenario or player. Because, as you reminded me and rightfully corrected me, such tactical choices from round to round not being available really render the whole issue as not a concern.

So with so few people opting and wanting for 1 as the default it seems that the vast majority of other players will not have to worry about this for almost all their games potentially.



It would be a little bit like there happens to be a couple (few) more blind players than usual in a tournament (very rare for an Irish ch though) and so really this would be fine with the vast majority of players including myself, and I would be ok with playing one or two games like this. Nit ideal but hey we all want to do our bit to help. That kinda takes care of issue 1 more or less?

So. with all the guidelines, changes etc etc, and posts here, we are only left with one single issue! Just one, which though I seem (at least publicly- others won’t or don’t like to make a fuss or rock the boat so speak) to be the only prospective player who has a huge problem.

Not merely wearing masks for 9 days in a row, for many hours each day, but there being no choice for anybody not to wear a mask, and indeed have it as a condition of playing a chess game that you have to wear a mask.

It seems undeniable that ths is by far the greatest change and most transformative, and I would say distortion and corrupting measure and change in the playing conditions for players.



So why not make this an option, so that if some players want to wear a mask they can, while others can choose not to. Given a free and open honest choice do we really think that the vast majority would choose to wear such a mask? I have no doubt some would and I can hazard a guess as to those players might be and those would would not choose to wear a mask, but it is only a hunch and could be wrong and is an irrelevancy anyway.

There is a world of a difference in presenting to and telling players that they have no real choice and they either have to just go along with something or they can’t play and or offering them a real choice.



Instead of accepting a whole package of measures and having players passively accept this whole, why not simply ask every one of the players listed as participants something along the lines of the following:

Hi guys N gals.
Just wondering if you would might be able to confirm what would be your preference in making masks optional for each player for the duration of the tournament.

1 Keep the new measure and force all players to wear masks for all 9 days of the tournament?
2 Let all players have the option to wear a mask or not?

We have had a second look at this and we think that it would be really useful if we knew what all the players preference was on this single issue. Also be helpful to know if anybody objects to or feels strongly about players having the option to wear a mask?

What would be so bad about all that?

How would that not be a win, win for everybody? Players who wanna wear a mask can do so and those who don’t, won’t. All the while the crucial thing being that all players abide by all the other best practices and consider those around them and across the at all times.

At the end of the day, you and the ICU can do whatever you like and players will go along with it for sure I think. Maybe there won’t be any great loss in terms of players not playing because of this single issue but I am in doubt that it will not be a gain for the tournament or enhance the pleasure or enjoyment of the players, let alone the reputation or prestige of the tournament generally.

By contrast, does anyone think there would be anybody who would withdraw or decide not to play in the 2020 Irish ch based on players being allowed the option to not wear a mask? Let such a player/s come forward then? Even sodacat has indicated that he would accept playing a player with no mask, maybe gmac would confirm the same?



That would be positive and helpful surely. I mean, we want more people to be more happy playing right.
td p { background: transparent } p { margin-bottom: 0.25cm; line-height: 115%; background: transparent } a:link { color: #000080; so-language: zxx; text-decoration: underline }

cdeb

spidersweb wrote: »

How would that not be a win, win for everybody? Players who wanna wear a mask can do so and those who don’t, won’t.

Would it be still be a win if someone contracts coronavirus from someone who didn't really feel like wearing a mask?

Because you've still shown no reason at all why your view should trump ECU's medical experts, the ICU's medical advice, the WHO's own medical experts, etc.

Why, in that context, should your opinion count?

(Also, agree with sodacat that this is a matter for the covid thread, not this one. I'll move the posts now)

macelligott

cdeb wrote: »

The ECU consulted with doctors who are chess players to get a chess-specific view, and among their conclusions on the resumption of chess in Europe was that "Face surgical mask is strongly recommended for all players" And it seems the ICU also have sought medical advice as well.

Who have you consulted with?.

I’ve mentioned the Gemma O’Doherty school of medicine before.
Has the ICU consulted them?
Or is the ICU carefully cherry picking from whom it gets its advice?
All very well consulting doctors, but can they be trusted?
Gemma, on the other hand, claims to have definitive proof that masks are very dangerous!
“Just saying” as Donald Trump might say.

cdeb

macelligott wrote: »

Gemma, on the other hand, claims to have definitive proof that masks are very dangerous!

Ah, the bauld Gemma.

Sued the State over covid measures, and then when invited to cross-examine the State's medical expert, she had no questions.

Does that remind you of anyone?

spidersweb

sodacat11 wrote: »

I thought that the Government was advising against all non essential travel? Greece may very well be safer than many other countries but it is likely have a lot of tourists from other countries which aren't. I am not convinced either about the safety of air travel regardless of what Michael O'Leary might say. Anyway I guess this is more a discussion for the "Coronavirus"thread than here.

They are constantly looking at the situation and yes now they advise against travel but on Monday they will be announcing new advice which many believe will have a list of countries on a green list which it is safe to travel to and from Greece is one of those, but we will have to wait and see. I think some countries will not make it on the list whereas people had thought they would. We will just wait until Monday, which is my point.

sodacat11

spidersweb wrote: »

2 The wearing of masks with no option for the players.








Instead of accepting a whole package of measures and having players passively accept this whole, why not simply ask every one of the players listed as participants something along the lines of the following:

Hi guys N gals.
Just wondering if you would might be able to confirm what would be your preference in making masks optional for each player for the duration of the tournament.



What would be so bad about all that?





By contrast, does anyone think there would be anybody who would withdraw or decide not to play in the 2020 Irish ch based on players being allowed the option to not wear a mask? Let such a player/s come forward then? Even sodacat has indicated that he would accept playing a player with no mask, maybe gmac would confirm the same?



That would be positive and helpful surely. I mean, we want more people to be more happy playing right.
td p { background: transparent } p { margin-bottom: 0.25cm; line-height: 115%; background: transparent } a:link { color: #000080; so-language: zxx; text-decoration: underline }

I think that you are completely missing the point about masks, their main function is not to protect the wearer, it is to protect everyone else.

I don't think that I said that I would accept playing a player with no mask, I think that I said that I said that I would still play if masks were optional, I would probably refuse to play anyone who wasn't wearing a mask though even if that meant my defaulting the game.

spidersweb

macelligott wrote: »

I’ve mentioned the Gemma O’Doherty school of medicine before.
Has the ICU consulted them?
Or is the ICU carefully cherry picking from whom it gets its advice?
All very well consulting doctors, but can they be trusted?
Gemma, on the other hand, claims to have definitive proof that masks are very dangerous!
“Just saying” as Donald Trump might say.

A really odd comment and reference. Don't understand it at all How is it in any way relevant to anything posted by anyone here and this topic?


It looks like a strange attempt to somehow smear or associate and conflate different and irrelevant issues. That looks like odd and bad faith posting to me.

Here are two chaps on your and cdep seemingly fav website Youtube ? :

https://youtu.be/C1ODBTdNiG0

They are having a discussion that might be of interest. I suppose they don't know anything about what they are talking about either. I mean what would they know right?

DancingSpaniel

I'm wondering how safe chess is, even with masks? You're talking 4-6 hours opposite someone, indoors. Someone who will likely get quite agitated if the position gets tense or there's a time scramble. If they're not infected, it doesn't matter. If they are, I think you're likely to be exposed to quite a dose of the virus. What I think doesn't matter of course, I'm wondering if anyone has seen studies of viral transmission in this type of context?? The 2m guideline applies to everyday interactions, not the duration of a chess game.

On the mask front, I'm wearing one while playing online (looks weird, I know) and you get used to it after a while.

Well done to the ICU for putting in the work to make an Irish this year possible.

sodacat11

DancingSpaniel wrote: »

I'm wondering how safe chess is, even with masks? You're talking 4-6 hours opposite someone, indoors. Someone who will likely get quite agitated if the position gets tense or there's a time scramble. If they're not infected, it doesn't matter. If they are, I think you're likely to be exposed to quite a dose of the virus. What I think doesn't matter of course, I'm wondering if anyone has seen studies of viral transmission in this type of context?? The 2m guideline applies to everyday interactions, not the duration of a chess game.

On the mask front, I'm wearing one while playing online (looks weird, I know) and you get used to it after a while.

Well done to the ICU for putting in the work to make an Irish this year possible.

There will be a perspex/glass screen between the players I think, this, with masks, should eliminate any risk

spidersweb

sodacat11 wrote: »

I think that you are completely missing the point about masks, their main function is not to protect the wearer, it is to protect everyone else.

I don't think that I said that I would accept playing a player with no mask, I think that I said that I said that I would still play if masks were optional, I would probably refuse to play anyone who wasn't wearing a mask though even if that meant my defaulting the game.

Thanks for the further clarification. You will default games because someone is not wearing a mask.That is very clear alright and that would be your CHOICE.

What would you do if almost every player was choosing not to wear a mask?

You do know that are also many legal medical grounds for some people not wearing a mask? I mean gmac is fine taking a risk with mild asthma which is not so bad but there are a plethora of reasons why some people are ,in varying degrees, strongly or mildly advised not to wear masks.

Are they going to be excluded from participating too? Sounds like discrimination to me? There may well be the odd player or two who for medical reasons are advised against wearing masks for any prolonged period of time. Suppose we will have to allow for exceptions then?



Could always then compromise by just playing with the 2 board option then. That way you could wear your mask and the opponent could choose not to wear and you would be so far apart it would not be a problem at all.

In fact, now that I think of it. The rules and guidelines stipulate that you only have to wear masks when your opponent is at the board? Right. So basically if someone really does not want to wear a mask then all they need do is play all their games with the two board option and you will not be defaulting against players then?


How did we overlook this?

Jasus, the two board option might become all the rage?

spidersweb

Retd.LoyolaCpt wrote: »

.......

Thanks for taking the time to reply. That is very much appreciated. Unfortunately though,and sorry to say it but, there are things that I would dispute and find unsatisfactory in what, at times, were very selective responses.

A glaring example of this would the response to this:
To cap it all all off, and as as if to underscore the impression of a certain contempt or utter indifference to all the participants there are no details about the prizes. Aside from a reference to a prize fund of 4000, There is no information about 1st,2nd, 3rd (4th 5th?) or about Grading prizes, if there are any, and if so, what are they.
There is a flyer. https://www.icu.ie/system/events/fly...pdf?1594466211

Which frankly is tantamount to something along the lines of perhaps. Go away and look at this, here is a link- end of story. (Except that it is far from the end of the story)
A more useful (fair) honest and maybe appropriate response might be something along the lines of:
Yeah that is a good point, thanks for highlighting this. We slipped up there. There really should have been details of the prizes as you mentioned them. We only put this link up very recently (maybe in response to this comment- maybe just a coincidence) and actually there are no further details about the prizes except the first prize is now listed, none others are, still, but they will be.
Which begs the question why not now? Again this is a national championships for goodness sake. So much good and hard work is done by the ICU and yourself, why not take care of such a detail, when not doing so looks so poor? Try explaining to a non chess player that you don’t know what the prizes are for an Irish ch? They laugh at you or are just incredulous.
What is incredibly telling is the fact that not one single person on here picked up and or made any comment on this at all. Nothing! So fair play to you for noticing and at least acknowledging this.
Still, don’t get me wrong, there is much that is very informative and helpful from your responses, but for fear of wasting your time and attention, I would rather focus onn a few specifics at this time (a mention of other stuff maybe later- just for the purposes of clarification) and I would just like to offer a suggestion or make a request.

How about we take a step back and being mindful of the fact that we all accept that the overwhelming number of changes for the 2020 Irish ch, while not welcome, in of themselves, or conducive to more rather than less enjoyment or just satisfaction , for the players, are nevertheless needed to insure good practice in the circumstances we are living in with this “pandemic”.



Full credit is given to the ICU and all those behind the scenes trying their best to have the event go ahead with as little disruption or distortion as is possible under very difficult circumstances, but perhaps we can all just do even better?

Two issues only have been identified out of all this and while all the changes and special measures have been presented as a whole package, these two specifics could, and I clearly contend should be dealt with on their own.

1 The two boards option V one board option.
2 The wearing of masks with no option for the players.

According to yourself it seems that in the case of 1 there are actually very few who will opt for the two board choice, but some will, and they will have to make that choice from the start and for the duration of the tournament.

Thus, as you correctly point out, greatly diminishing the chance of anyone trying to “game the system”, though not completely in the sense that if a player knows any other participant is willing to not play them and in advance of the event tells people this publicly someone might decide to choose this option in the hope of maybe picking up a free point here or there maybe?

Seems very unlikely that we will have such a scenario or player. Because, as you reminded me and rightfully corrected me, such tactical choices from round to round not being available really render the whole issue as not a concern.

So with so few people opting and wanting for 1 as the default it seems that the vast majority of other players will not have to worry about this for almost all their games potentially.



It would be a little bit like there happens to be a couple (few) more blind players than usual in a tournament (very rare for an Irish ch though) and so really this would be fine with the vast majority of players including myself, and I would be ok with playing one or two games like this. Nit ideal but hey we all want to do our bit to help. That kinda takes care of issue 1 more or less?

So. with all the guidelines, changes etc etc, and posts here, we are only left with one single issue! Just one, which though I seem (at least publicly- others won’t or don’t like to make a fuss or rock the boat so speak) to be the only prospective player who has a huge problem.

Not merely wearing masks for 9 days in a row, for many hours each day, but there being no choice for anybody not to wear a mask, and indeed have it as a condition of playing a chess game that you have to wear a mask.

It seems undeniable that ths is by far the greatest change and most transformative, and I would say distortion and corrupting measure and change in the playing conditions for players.



So why not make this an option, so that if some players want to wear a mask they can, while others can choose not to. Given a free and open honest choice do we really think that the vast majority would choose to wear such a mask? I have no doubt some would and I can hazard a guess as to those players might be and those would would not choose to wear a mask, but it is only a hunch and could be wrong and is an irrelevancy anyway.

There is a world of a difference in presenting to and telling players that they have no real choice and they either have to just go along with something or they can’t play and or offering them a real choice.



Instead of accepting a whole package of measures and having players passively accept this whole, why not simply ask every one of the players listed as participants something along the lines of the following:

Hi guys N gals.
Just wondering if you would might be able to confirm what would be your preference in making masks optional for each player for the duration of the tournament.

1 Keep the new measure and force all players to wear masks for all 9 days of the tournament?
2 Let all players have the option to wear a mask or not?

We have had a second look at this and we think that it would be really useful if we knew what all the players preference was on this single issue. Also be helpful to know if anybody objects to or feels strongly about players having the option to wear a mask?

What would be so bad about all that?

How would that not be a win, win for everybody? Players who wanna wear a mask can do so and those who don’t, won’t. All the while the crucial thing being that all players abide by all the other best practices and consider those around them and across the at all times.

At the end of the day, you and the ICU can do whatever you like and players will go along with it for sure I think. Maybe there won’t be any great loss in terms of players not playing because of this single issue but I am in doubt that it will not be a gain for the tournament or enhance the pleasure or enjoyment of the players, let alone the reputation or prestige of the tournament generally.

By contrast, does anyone think there would be anybody who would withdraw or decide not to play in the 2020 Irish ch based on players being allowed the option to not wear a mask? Let such a player/s come forward then? Even sodacat has indicated that he would accept playing a player with no mask, maybe gmac would confirm the same?



That would be positive and helpful surely. I mean, we want more people to be more happy playing right.

sodacat11

In the very unlikely event that masks become optional and that I was the only one wearing one then I guess I would just have to consider my options, whether to withdraw altogether or maybe I would decide that the two board system was safe enough. It is all hypothetical so it doesn't really matter. I will be playing and we will be wearing masks. As I already pointed out, masks are there to protect other people. IF there is a slight risk of asthma or a cut ear then that is a small price to pay for potentially saving someone's life.

spidersweb

sodacat11 wrote: »

There will be a perspex/glass screen between the players I think, this, with masks, should eliminate any risk

Actually the 2 board option solves all these issues it seems (new issues presented then of course)


Players only need to wear masks when their opponent is at the board. as there are two boards and players are very very far apart and not on the same board, players not wanting to wear a mask should choose the two board option.



I think the idea about getting virus is all about the numbers of people you interact with and the closeness, The chances of getting the virus in the circumstances of this event are as good as ZERO and then if one was to get it, never rule out the possibility. The chances of it being serious unless you are 70 plus and have underlining health issues (some will) then the chances of anything bad happening are so small that better chance of being struck by lightning,


This : https://youtu.be/C1ODBTdNiG0 makes for interesting listening. assuming they are wrong, we have to contend with countless experts arguing this way and indeed the other.



Facts are that about 1300 (I think) people in Ireland are accredited as having died of covid and the median age is 83. The notion that there is any risk to any of the 30 or so players in the Irish ch is just fantastical, if only because so many of the measures of safe distancing make it so safe.


1 M or 2 M debates rage all over and vary from country and expert alike. Sitting passively with NO PHYSICAL CONTACT and NO TALKING engagement across a table renders it so safe as to be funny.

spidersweb

sodacat11 wrote: »

In the very unlikely event that masks become optional and that I was the only one wearing one then I guess I would just have to consider my options, whether to withdraw altogether or maybe I would decide that the two board system was safe enough. It is all hypothetical so it doesn't really matter. I will be playing and we will be wearing masks. As I already pointed out, masks are there to protect other people. IF there is a slight risk of asthma or a cut ear then that is a small price to pay for potentially saving someone's life.

Saving someones life? That is what this is all about? You really believe that?

As I said there are many medical and legal grounds for people not being forced to wear a mask. Anyway.

There is a trial run coming up and changes may be made or not. Yeah we shall see I guess .And maybe more players will actually get involved in the masks issue and realize that the choice to not wear a mask or play on two boards is not the best for them or the tournament.

Your position is that you want to choose to deny other people a choice, instead of being really safe and just cancel the event and have zero risk!

You are not alone in this alright. The two board option and no need for masks just might catch on now. I might well play now myself and will encourage as many others of like mind to also opt for the two board if changes are not made after the trial run this weekend.

sodacat11

spidersweb wrote: »

The two board option and no need for masks just might catch on now. I might well play now myself and will encourage as many others of like mind to also opt for the two board if changes are not made after the trial run this weekend.

I am sure that your participation will come as a great relief to us all and that every self respecting Irish chess player will heed your advice and act accordingly.

anchor4208

spidersweb wrote: »

Here are two chaps on your and cdep seemingly fav website Youtube ? :

https://youtu.be/C1ODBTdNiG0

They are having a discussion that might be of interest. I suppose they don't know anything about what they are talking about either. I mean what would they know right?

What would they know indeed. One of them was sacked by the university he worked with for giving all of his pupils an A+, and the other is one of America's most prominent anti-vaxxers despite having no medical qualification. Its hard to find an internet profile of either of them that doesn't have the word 'discredited' in it.

spidersweb

anchor4208 wrote: »

What would they know indeed. One of them was sacked by the university he worked with for giving all of his pupils an A+, and the other is one of America's most prominent anti-vaxxers despite having no medical qualification. Its hard to find an internet profile of either of them that doesn't have the word 'discredited' in it.

Meanwhile a few days ago http://www.qcc.cz/turnaje/148-sachovy-festival-ceske-budejovice/639-sachovy-festival-ceske-budejovice-sledoval-cely-svet

RooksPawn

Good. I used to enjoy reading this thread but I have scrolled through the past few spidersweb posts in exasperation.

Meanwhile, Cabinet decision today extending the 50-people limit for indoor gatherings until 10 August means that is the maximum number of people who can be present at the Irish Championship, including organisers, arbiters, caterers, cleaners etc., which probably is not a problem as there is unlikely to be an entry much above 30?

And I haven't heard all the details but I think it means face coverings obligatory while indoors.

spidersweb

anchor4208 wrote: »

What would they know indeed. One of them was sacked by the university he worked with for giving all of his pupils an A+, and the other is one of America's most prominent anti-vaxxers despite having no medical qualification. Its hard to find an internet profile of either of them that doesn't have the word 'discredited' in it.

The guy on the right is "an Emmy Award winning producer on the CBS talk show The Doctors, Del uncovered a story of corruption so morally bankrupt and profound that it destroyed his politics, his trust in medical science, and his belief in the mainstream media establishment that refused to allow him to do his job"

Personally I don't like him or find him impressive actually. But the video was interesting nevertheless.

The guy on the left knows and understands more than you or I will ever know about the topics he is engaged with. I am not sure what to make of him but I would trust him far more than that guy Luke O Neil on Tuburdy late late emphatically saying masks were totally unnecessary unless you have covid. I regard him as a clown and with deep suspicion. Same would be true for a lot of "senior people" in power and influence at the center of this current crisis.

If you are going to just dismiss the guy in pure tabloid fashion, at least give some source of information about him>? Here is his wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Rancourt#Suspension,_dismissal,_and_Foisy_arbitration

Here is an interesting portion:

“In June 2009 all charges against Rancourt in relation to his January 2009 campus arrest for trespassing were dropped. In July 2009 Rancourt received Employment Insurance (EI) payments after EI found that the university's position that he was dismissed with cause (thereby barring benefit payments) could not be upheld.
In December 2008, Rancourt's research associate of over 12 years Dr. Mei-Zhen Dang was locked out of the laboratory and fired without notice, explanation or compensation. In February 2009 she sued the universityURL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Link_rot"][I]permanent dead link[/I][/URL and in August 2009 she won a settlement. Two graduate students of Rancourt were also claimants on the lawsuit and alleged that they had been punished for being in Rancourt's research group. The graduate students stated they were intimidated with threats to their scholarships into dropping the lawsuit and their lawyer stated that a salient feature of the case is that "it has a very political nature."
In 2011, the dismissal case went to binding labor arbitration with Arbitrator Claude Foisy presiding. There were almost 30 days of hearings, with the last hearing day being June 26, 2013. The arbitration judgement was expected within a few months of the end of the hearings. During the hearings the University accused Rancourt of "inciting students to violence", and put a YouTube music video about anarchism into evidence. Following the conclusion of the arbitration hearings, The Chronicle of Higher Education characterized the case as "raising questions about academic freedom and its limits".

It is curious that when you dismiss and rubbish him you failed to mention that he won his case against that UNI and there was a lot more to the whole affair,
I keep an open mind on all that business.

All that matter is if what they are saying true and to what extent. Does it make sense and seem to be based on good data and understanding?, They are by no means even close to being alone in many of the things they say.

I should trust you over either of them? No, sorry I don't. Nor would I expect you to trust me over them either.

The point is that people can have all sort of beliefs and ideas and be right about some and wrong about others. The term anti-vaxxers is just another label and apparent insult. It is meaningless to me as it it is not something I am that interested in or know much about. I have no problem in anybody having issues and strong reservations about forced vaccines. its up to themselves but it is irrelevant in relation to this topic.

The amount of examples that someone could post about these topics would be countless. People are very capable of holding bad and wrong ideas along with correct and well informed ideas.

How many videos would you want just saying that the wearing of a mask should be restricted to only those with the virus and or in some specific situations and jobs.

sodacat11

Any chance that we could return to posts that have something to do with chess?

spidersweb

RooksPawn wrote: »

Good. I used to enjoy reading this thread but I have scrolled through the past few spidersweb posts in exasperation.

Meanwhile, Cabinet decision today extending the 50-people limit for indoor gatherings until 10 August means that is the maximum number of people who can be present at the Irish Championship, including organisers, arbiters, caterers, cleaners etc., which probably is not a problem as there is unlikely to be an entry much above 30?

And I haven't heard all the details but I think it means face coverings obligatory while indoors.

That is another very funny post. You are of course WRONG about the wearing of masks indoor being made mandatory. It is being made mandatory in very specific narrow situations and not the situation that pertains in the Irish ch, but never let the facts get in the way of your exasperation.



The great thing is that thanks to you and the likes of gmac and sodcat I am more and more likely to play in the Irish ch now. You are indeed doing a great service to Irish chess. Well done!

spidersweb

sodacat11 wrote: »

Any chance that we could return to posts that have something to do with chess?

I agree, but what is the name of this thread and who moved so much of the exchanges here? Just think of the wonderful role you have been playing in making it more and more likely that I will play in the Irish ch. You deserve a medal.

spidersweb

sodacat11 wrote: »

Any chance that we could return to posts that have something to do with chess?

BTW do you have any inside info on what the prizes for the Irish actually are. I seen they have just put up a flyer that mentions 1st prize , but no idea about the rest of the prizes. You would surely be interested in, and in with a shout of a grading prize?

I think Alex Byrne, the young lad won it last year wonderful to see the kid get 500. Surely you would be in the hunt again this year too?

sodacat11

spidersweb wrote: »

BTW do you have any inside info on what the prizes for the Irish actually are. I seen they have just put up a flyer that mentions 1st prize , but no idea about the rest of the prizes. You would surely be interested in, and in with a shout of a grading prize?

I think Alex Byrne, the young lad won it last year wonderful to see the kid get 500. Surely you would be in the hunt again this year too?

Thank you for the medal and I am honoured to be a factor in such a great entity as your good self deciding to play in the championship.
I came last in the championship last year without winning a game so I very much doubt that I would be among the favourites to win a grading prize but if you are willing to offer generous odds like the 10,000/1 you gave me in 2012 I will certainly have a bet. Hopefully this time you won't withdraw the offer when I am going well as you did the last time.

anchor4208

spidersweb wrote: »

If you are going to just dismiss the guy in pure tabloid fashion, at least give some source of information about him>? Here is his wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denis_Rancourt#Suspension,_dismissal,_and_Foisy_arbitration

Here is an interesting portion:


It is curious that when you dismiss and rubbish him you failed to mention that he won his case against that UNI

Hilarious. He lost the case against the university. The wikipedia report on his battle with the university finishes saying that it went to binding arbitration. He lost that arbitration. Even though it was binding, he then appealed to the Canadian Associated of University Teachers. They carried out an independent review, and guess what, he also lost that (https://www.caut.ca/sites/default/files/final-independent-committee-of-inquiry-rancourt-university-of-ottawa-2017-12.pdf). Academically speaking, the guy is a busted flush.

I'm going to opt out of this debate now. Your posts are too long and rambling to read. The science behind your position is bogus. Your own position is inconsistent (moving from stating that its un-enjoyable and bad for your health to play wearing a mask and no self respecting chess player should consider it to stating that you'll probably play anyway (and you're still listed on the entry list)).

Hopefully we'll get to play each other in a couple of weeks. That's what this forum is all about at the end of the day, playing chess.

spidersweb

anchor4208 wrote: »

Hilarious. He lost the case against the university. The wikipedia report on his battle with the university finishes saying that it went to binding arbitration. He lost that arbitration. Even though it was binding, he then appealed to the Canadian Associated of University Teachers. They carried out an independent review, and guess what, he also lost that (https://www.caut.ca/sites/default/files/final-independent-committee-of-inquiry-rancourt-university-of-ottawa-2017-12.pdf). Academically speaking, the guy is a busted flush.

I'm going to opt out of this debate now. Your posts are too long and rambling to read. The science behind your position is bogus. Your own position is inconsistent (moving from stating that its un-enjoyable and bad for your health to play wearing a mask and no self respecting chess player should consider it to stating that you'll probably play anyway (and you're still listed on the entry list)).

Hopefully we'll get to play each other in a couple of weeks. That's what this forum is all about at the end of the day, playing chess.

Can't beat them join them! I have not changed my views one iota! I have just adapted and decided to take a very different approach. It will be miserable, an utter crap Irish ch, farcical, a joke, a circus of sorts, a freak show, but guess what? That is what people are so evidently willing to accept and go along with. Its absurd, but then so is the CLOWN WORLD and times we are living in. I just have to see it all as a huge challenge and make the most of a rotten situation. What does not kill us can make us stronger.

I will be playing without a mask, based on choosing the two board option throughout. I will take the risk and just endure the whole awful unpleasantness that the tournament doubtless will be. But at least I will have born witness to it all first hand and be able to say I went through the experience like everyone else. The pubs are closed until the day after the end of the tournament too! So there will be a respite and relief just after it all ends.

There is no choice really, other than doing the sane and safe thing of not playing, which is exactly what I should do, but I am mad like that and I went from being despondent and despairing and disappointed to pissed off and angry. Feels great now!

I have you and a few others to thank for helping to inspire and motivate me and make me change my mind, though lets see how the trial run goes first too and what the Government travel announcement for Greece is on Monday

.As for the guy in the left. I had said that I kept an open mind about the uni business of that guy and mentioned that crucially All that matter is if what they are saying true and to what extent. Does it make sense and seem to be based on good data and understanding?, They are by no means even close to being alone in many of the things they say.

The link you gave is a dead one that give an error message and I had stopped reading his wiki page after this:
The arbitration judgement was expected within a few months of the end of the hearings.[ During the hearings the University accused Rancourt of "inciting students to violence", and put a YouTube music video about anarchism into evidence.[Following the conclusion of the arbitration hearings, The Chronicle of Higher Education characterized the case as "raising questions about academic freedom and its limits"


That is enough for me to be very unsure about that whole uni business.

All of which is irrelevant because I said that video was just one of countless examples and the fact is that so much of what we are being told is just wrong, inconsistent and ought to be questioned, if not down right rejected.

If I was over 65 an or in my 80s I would be far more worried and feel far less safe wearing a mask for hours on end for nine days than any virus out there. It is no Spanish flu or anything like it and about 93% of claimed covid deaths here are all over 65

Objectively speaking I do not think the Irish ch should be played under the conditions that pertain, but I am a tiny minority voice and bow to the wishes of others. No issue, no problem.

Anyway we have to agree to disagree and I will hopefully see you over the chess boards in a few weeks. I promise I will be gentle.

anchor4208

spidersweb wrote: »

The link you gave is a dead one that give an error message

Here's the correct link https://www.caut.ca/sites/default/files/final-independent-committee-of-inquiry-rancourt-university-of-ottawa-2017-12.pdf

spidersweb wrote: »

I will be playing without a mask, based on choosing the two board option throughout.

You might want to clarify your interpretation of the conditions with the organisers. You are the only person here who has interpreted them to mean that you won't have to wear a mask in the two board games. Most everyone else is interpreting them that the same mask wearing conditions apply in both cases.

macelligott

How easily the virus can spread at gatherings without masks. From The Guardian Newspaper:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/16/hospital-boss-who-blamed-covid-19-outbreak-on-staff-pictured-without-mask

sodacat11

anchor4208 wrote: »

Most everyone else is interpreting them that the same mask wearing conditions apply in both cases.

Hear this, O foolish and senseless people,
who have eyes, but do not see,
who have ears, but do not hear.