bigdoug wrote:
For the benefit of us non english speakers, what does "plum" mean in this context?
A plum is a silly ,stupid,idiot,
sore LOOSERS
Sort:
Stalling is against the rules in other competitive mind sports. It's too bad that it isn't against the rules in Chess, too. I think it should be. You lost - get on with the rest of the tournament...
The whole "Looser vs. Loser" thing is funny - you'd be amazed at how often I see that in other online games. I don't think it's a simple typo. I think the kids really believe loser is spelled with 2 O's.
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
tabatha, it's bad form to keep posting to your own topic to bump it up in the queue
eh?
I resign when I have no more useful moves, I think that's the best way to maximize your chances of using an opponents blunders when they are winning and not being a jerk or a loser.
uritbon wrote:
I resign when I have no more useful moves, I think that's the best way to maximize your chances of using an opponents blunders when they are winning and not being a jerk or a loser.
its ok to play on for practice ,my point is when you are 1 or 2 moves from mate and the plum stops playing and lets the time run out!!!!!!!
Letting your time run out when you are losing is a bad idea. It just makes your timeout % go up, and you can't access certain features with a higher %. Just resign or play out until a checkmate.
Sometimes it behooves a man to sit in silence and let some measure pass by without comment or simply sublimate the matter into more useful channels; but in this case, in consideration of the seriousness & obviously subtle ramifications of the entire conceptual framework of this topic, it was clear to me that someone must say something about the significant overtones and undercurrents that are plain to see here, even to the myopic, and denied only to "those who will not see". None are so blind.
While many have spoken and we do consider both the validity and degree of significance manifested, there is also a solid contextual core beneath the thin veneer that some would use to attempt to obscure the most numinous of motives attached herein; and still defy interpretations which the wise man or other person will always see, shining thru powerfully, like unto some strongly shining thing, engaging in habit, or beyond that its innate nature to do this.
Just because we can look to our game and say, there is a winner & a loser, unless there is not, as in a Draw for instance; how can we say with certainty, in good conscience, who is Looser? Think about this, & you must soon find the entire conceptualization bears an odor of unimpeachable dehumanization that is not so much entropic as chronicly colonicly-ectopic yet burning to break free of the so called 'chains that bind it". It cannot be more plainly stated for those who remain overly-inflated, & yet it holds up to intencest scrutiny & bears that aura of invincibility of that eventual reaction, if not intent, which ultimately cannot bedenied nor placated by other than finally terminating this struggle from within.
Most can agree, it is not fitting to deceive nor delay the inevitable moment of gratification, despite whatever present consternation or constipation may be present before that amidst their yearning for deflation.
And still there will always be they and them who can, and indeed feel they must, rationalize the entire process without full consideration of the essential elements to which they prefer to remain oblivious & fastitiously unreconciled toward the factitious nature & appearance of their stance. That is why he must sit tight and endeavor to clarify and substantiate the intent to overcome & win even this epic battle ... to explore the depth & breadth of that wellspring of excuse from which our inner-loser shall dip and pour if he becomes looser.
How loose can a loser be, whether he has lost it or simply stares in the face of imminent loss? ... When the whole thing is unstoppable, and an unfathonable flow of bitterness & bile finally explodes into his world from deep within the inner self? Just like a goose, Chessfriends ... as loose as the goose (when the goose is loose...). And that, It speaks for itself. We can all sleep sounder now. Thank You. 
}B-D
you know, "lose" does not rhyme with "hose," unless you add a "w" to get "whose." That's weird.
BaronDerKilt wrote:
Sometimes it behooves a man to sit in silence and let some measure pass by without comment or simply sublimate the matter into more useful channels; but in this case, in consideration of the seriousness & obviously subtle ramifications of the entire conceptual framework of this topic, it was clear to me that someone must say something about the significant overtones and undercurrents that are plain to see here, even to the myopic, and denied only to "those who will not see". None are so blind.
While many have spoken and we do consider both the validity and degree of significance manifested, there is also a solid contextual core beneath the thin veneer that some would use to attempt to obscure the most numinous of motives attached herein; and still defy interpretations which the wise man or other person will always see, shining thru powerfully, like unto some strongly shining thing, engaging in habit, or beyond that its innate nature to do this.
Just because we can look to our game and say, there is a winner & a loser, unless there is not, as in a Draw for instance; how can we say with certainty, in good conscience, who is Looser? Think about this, & you must soon find the entire conceptualization bears an odor of unimpeachable dehumanization that is not so much entropic as chronicly colonicly-ectopic yet burning to break free of the so called 'chains that bind it". It cannot be more plainly stated for those who remain overly-inflated, & yet it holds up to intencest scrutiny & bears that aura of invincibility of that eventual reaction, if not intent, which ultimately cannot bedenied nor placated by other than finally terminating this struggle from within.
Most can agree, it is not fitting to deceive nor delay the inevitable moment of gratification, despite whatever present consternation or constipation may be present before that amidst their yearning for deflation.
And still there will always be they and them who can, and indeed feel they must, rationalize the entire process without full consideration of the essential elements to which they prefer to remain oblivious & fastitiously unreconciled toward the factitious nature & appearance of their stance. That is why he must sit tight and endeavor to clarify and substantiate the intent to overcome & win even this epic battle ... to explore the depth & breadth of that wellspring of excuse from which our inner-loser shall dip and pour if he becomes looser.
How loose can a loser be, whether he has lost it or simply stares in the face of imminent loss? ... When the whole thing is unstoppable, and an unfathonable flow of bitterness & bile finally explodes into his world from deep within the inner self? Just like a goose, Chessfriends ... as loose as the goose (when the goose is loose...). And that, It speaks for itself. We can all sleep sounder now. Thank You.
}B-D
B-d you are muchos cooolios 
Wicked
bigdoug wrote:
you know, "lose" does not rhyme with "hose," unless you add a "w" to get "whose." That's weird.
Or a "c" to get "close".
I try to remember those unsporting chess player wannabes but my memory is like a software with corrupted address. It's there but recalling it is a herculean task. So I end up playing them again..
It is only a game, but that is our purpose here. If you are not here for chess, why are you starting games? I'm speaking of course to those who like to start games but not finish games. Do they go to a restaurant and order a meal but not eat? They come to a chess site, start a game, and then decide not to play. I have had people start games, play less than 10 moves, and then resign. I've also had players blitz off 20-30 moves and then when they are dead lost they decide they didn't really want to play, but don't want to resign either. yes we agree to a time limit and rules: but with the understanding that we are here, starting a game, with the intention of PLAYING A GAME, not playing games!
Doctorjosephthomas wrote:
It is only a game, but that is our purpose here. If you are not here for chess, why are you starting games? I'm speaking of course to those who like to start games but not finish games. Do they go to a restaurant and order a meal but not eat? They come to a chess site, start a game, and then decide not to play. I have had people start games, play less than 10 moves, and then resign. I've also had players blitz off 20-30 moves and then when they are dead lost they decide they didn't really want to play, but don't want to resign either. yes we agree to a time limit and rules: but with the understanding that we are here, starting a game, with the intention of PLAYING A GAME, not playing games!
Thats right! what suprises me is the ammont of plums on the tree though?
look on the bright side, at least they cant knock over the table and storm off claiming that its all your fault! LoL
Apr 5, 2009
0
#136
tabatha wrote:
BaronDerKilt wrote:
Sometimes it behooves a man to sit in silence and let some measure pass by without comment or simply sublimate the matter into more useful channels; but in this case, in consideration of the seriousness & obviously subtle ramifications of the entire conceptual framework of this topic, it was clear to me that someone must say something about the significant overtones and undercurrents that are plain to see here, even to the myopic, and denied only to "those who will not see". None are so blind.
While many have spoken and we do consider both the validity and degree of significance manifested, there is also a solid contextual core beneath the thin veneer that some would use to attempt to obscure the most numinous of motives attached herein; and still defy interpretations which the wise man or other person will always see, shining thru powerfully, like unto some strongly shining thing, engaging in habit, or beyond that its innate nature to do this.
Just because we can look to our game and say, there is a winner & a loser, unless there is not, as in a Draw for instance; how can we say with certainty, in good conscience, who is Looser? Think about this, & you must soon find the entire conceptualization bears an odor of unimpeachable dehumanization that is not so much entropic as chronicly colonicly-ectopic yet burning to break free of the so called 'chains that bind it". It cannot be more plainly stated for those who remain overly-inflated, & yet it holds up to intencest scrutiny & bears that aura of invincibility of that eventual reaction, if not intent, which ultimately cannot bedenied nor placated by other than finally terminating this struggle from within.
Most can agree, it is not fitting to deceive nor delay the inevitable moment of gratification, despite whatever present consternation or constipation may be present before that amidst their yearning for deflation.
And still there will always be they and them who can, and indeed feel they must, rationalize the entire process without full consideration of the essential elements to which they prefer to remain oblivious & fastitiously unreconciled toward the factitious nature & appearance of their stance. That is why he must sit tight and endeavor to clarify and substantiate the intent to overcome & win even this epic battle ... to explore the depth & breadth of that wellspring of excuse from which our inner-loser shall dip and pour if he becomes looser.
How loose can a loser be, whether he has lost it or simply stares in the face of imminent loss? ... When the whole thing is unstoppable, and an unfathonable flow of bitterness & bile finally explodes into his world from deep within the inner self? Just like a goose, Chessfriends ... as loose as the goose (when the goose is loose...). And that, It speaks for itself. We can all sleep sounder now. Thank You.
}B-D
B-d you are muchos cooolios Wicked
I just wanted to get the longest string quote going. Since there is an abunadnce of it on this thread.
Security is boring in case any of you were wondering
Once I was watching two strong players (Mike and Derek) play bullet - one minute chess. Mike shoved a pawn to attack Derek's Knight. Derek picked up the Knight and realized that no matter where he moved it, it would be captured. Seconds ticked away. As he stared at the board and the clock ticked and the precious time dwindled away, Mike suddenly asked, "Where ya gonna put the knight, STUPID?"
Derek picked up the chess clock, hurled it against the wall where it shattered into a zillion pieces, and stormed away.
bigdoug wrote:
Once I was watching two strong players (Mike and Derek) play bullet - one minute chess. Mike shoved a pawn to attack Derek's Knight. Derek picked up the Knight and realized that no matter where he moved it, it would be captured. Seconds ticked away. As he stared at the board and the clock ticked and the precious time dwindled away, Mike suddenly asked, "Where ya gonna put the knight, STUPID?"
Derek picked up the chess clock, hurled it against the wall where it shattered into a zillion pieces, and stormed away.
Ah the joys of a friendly game of chess!
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
Did you know that loosen and unloosen mean the same thing?
lmao never knew
tabatha wrote:
uritbon wrote:
I resign when I have no more useful moves, I think that's the best way to maximize your chances of using an opponents blunders when they are winning and not being a jerk or a loser.
its ok to play on for practice ,my point is when you are 1 or 2 moves from mate and the plum stops playing and lets the time run out!!!!!!!
i agree i never give up but i wont sign off if the game could soon be over
ok...