English Chess Forum

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:23 am

I would scarcely be arguing that there was a cultural problem if I thought you were.

I think you might be confusing people defending Keene with people arguing what an appropriate level of consequence is again.

I think fundamentally some of our disagreement is that I think Keene has been held accountable to a large degree and you do not.

But are you arguing that people praising other people because they hope it is to their benefit, either through the rewards of innocent friendship or personal advantage, is a cultural problem unique to chess? If so, I disagree. To the extent I would like to welcome you to our planet, and hope you enjoy your stay here.

(I'm not sure if we are entertaining anyone other than ourselves, if so apologies to them while I go to my Dad's to watch the football...)

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:33 am

But are you arguing that people praising other people because they hope it is to their benefit, either through the rewards of innocent friendship or personal advantage, is a cultural problem unique to chess?

I have literally no idea what you are trying to say or where you are getting this from. Whatever "this" may be.

Perhaps you would like to explain the cultural problem in more detail so I do not misrepresent it?

I am unconvinced that the alleged lack of detail is the problem here.

(I mean I shall probably do so at one point or another, because it's what I think is most important generally. But not right now, and nor would it help.)

Paul Cooksey wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:26 am

O.G. Urcan wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:21 am

Beyond the well-known Donaldson affair, could Paul Cooksey kindly name one or two cases in which the injured party was compensated for Raymond Keene's plagiarism? Many thanks in advance. O.G. Urcan

I think the most extensive plagiarism was that of the My Great Predecessors series, which Justin exposed. It is matter of public record that Everyman became aware of it, as did Kasparov himself.

I do not believe they have chosen to make the outcome public. To be honest that isn't a part of chess history that particularly excites me, but perhaps they would respond to a letter.

If you are telling me that you are challenging my position that Keene has been accountable for plagiarism because the injured party has not publicised the outcome, I do not agree.

In reply to my question about cases of compensation, Paul Cooksey just refers vaguely to the Kasparov Predecessors series. Given that Raymond Keene has repeatedly denied that he ever plagiarized anything from those books, was there really a compensation settlement?

One injured party who was certainly never compensated is Edward Winter. A substantial text of his was plagiarized three times by Raymond Keene: in The Spectator, on a webpage and in a book by Keene. Mr Winter complained in Chess Notes, and also directly to the Editor of The Spectator (who never replied). That clear-cut case of plagiarism by Raymond Keene was even mentioned in Private Eye, but Mr Winter never received a word of apology, let alone compensation.

O.G. Urcan

Perhaps there was nothing sinister in Keene losing his columns.

Perhaps it was simply time for younger talent to take over.

Why should superannuated dinosaurs go on for ever? Luke and David have been a breath of fresh air.

Nick Ivell wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 12:54 pm

Perhaps there was nothing sinister in Keene losing his columns.

Perhaps it was simply time for younger talent to take over.

I don't believe this and neither do you, but it does illustrate the problem in their saying nothing.

JustinHorton wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 11:45 am

I am unconvinced that the alleged lack of detail is the problem here.

(I mean I shall probably do so at one point or another, because it's what I think is most important generally. But not right now, and nor would it help.)

If those are not the weaseliest weasel words written since Willy McWeasel won the 1937 British Weasel-Word Championship!

Note to anyone cross-questioned by Justin 'Citation Please' Horton on the forum: make a careful note of his words here and remember to quote them back at him at the appropriate moment.

Two lists by Justin Horton of his exposés regarding plagiarism by Raymond Keene:

http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... index.html

http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... index.html

Jonathan Bryant wrote: ↑

Sat Jun 12, 2021 8:31 pm

I agree. But what I’m saying is that they would happily go back.

Nothing more is known about Ray now than was known when Saunders and Upham were extremely proactive In counter attacking the evidence of his plagiarism

That's rubbish and you know it's rubbish. I have never once done anything of the sort, nor have I 'championed' Keene as you put it in your previous post. What I have done here, many years ago, is to speak out against posters who (a) think it's OK to traduce anyone who has ever been in the same room as Keene at chess events and (b) happily reference that ridiculous anonymous attack website which attempts to bully people into 'making a stand against' Keene. Plagiarism is bad but bullying is a far worse offence. Now, perhaps you and others, instead of avoiding the issue by employing the broken record technique and listing the charges against Keene for the umpteenth time, could address some of the points raised earlier by Paul Cooksey in a rather less dismissive way.

Guilty as charged!

I have been in the same room as Keene. We did a bit of analysis at the 2011 Varsity match.

Nick Ivell wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 5:59 pm

Guilty as charged!

I have been in the same room as Keene. We did a bit of analysis at the 2011 Varsity match.

You are dead to me. I am embarrassed even to share a first name.

Sorry, but I have more to add to the charge sheet.

I have said on previous threads that the book on Nimzowitsch is excellent.

O.G. Urcan wrote: ↑

Sun Jun 13, 2021 12:14 pm

In reply to my question about cases of compensation, Paul Cooksey just refers vaguely to the Kasparov Predecessors series.

I very much like that people are using my surname in referring to my posts, even when quoting me. I have chosen to view it as a sign I am important and worthy of respect, despite the fact I am random chess player expressing his opinions on an internet forum.

I did choose my worlds poorly. I should have said that I am not aware of any injured party being denied their right to compensation for GM Keene's plagiarism. I do not know why Mr Winter chose not to exercise his right, although some of the more obvious possible explanations might support the position I am arguing.

I tried to search my posts for any mention of "RDK", in case any ancient awkward Olly Robinson style post might surface which could be hung on me. Forewarned, etc. I was told the "RDK" is too common a word to be searchable, so I must hope for the best.