GC ! You mad that I didn't put your name in the poll? Sorry, I chose only King or above who post here with some frequency.

You really are a slippery customer. I am flabbergasted that you can sign up here just a few weeks ago, begin trolling immediately, cry out that you are a victim and then demand that Mig remove one of the moderators. You are a right royal pain in the ***. I am disappointed that so far Mig has not provided his moderators with strong public support (I guess that comment will get me into trouble) when all they are trying to do is bring a troll to account.

IMO this is not the time to be handing the moderator responsibilities to anyone new unless of course the current mods wish to step down. This is a time for supporting the mods to the hilt.

After all, I am a Topalov fan.

Is it such a big sin to be supporting Topalov that I should be called a troll for that ? After all, I didn't call you a troll for supporting Kramnik.

Oh, that's not it at all. Off the top of my head I can think of rondino, octal, and fearlab as Topalov fans who are assuredly not trolls. The difference is that they don't go on ridiculous tirades of accusation. You are a troll not because of supporting Topalov, but because you accuse those who don't support him of slander and, if they are moderators, abuse of power.

Did I accuse you of anything? Did I accuse SteveK of anything? In fact, I supported littlefish for mod nomination even though littlefish is by no means a Topalov supporter. I supported Russianbear who by no means is a Topalov supporter.

Many of my posts have been deleted. Of course, it is not possible for me to ascertain who deleted my posts. But, if I am debating a post with Petrosianic and if my argument is convincing -whoosh the post is gone. But again, I have never directly said that Petrosianic deleted my posts. It is not just I who have complained about moderator abuses- to my limited knowledge, Russianbear has done so, Chessbuff has done so and Chessfan has done so. I have given many examples where Petrosianic has twisted and misrepresented my position.

If you look at my posts, you will find very few personal attacks. But , if you look at Petrosianic's responses to me you will find they are full of personal attacks against me. He has called me a criminal on one occasion. I have documented those in my previous responses.

You accused me of posting my message because I was upset for not *wipes tear* being named in your poll. You accused SteveK of calling you a troll because you support Topalov. You're wrong on both counts, as I pointed out above.

It's generally accepted here that post count does not decrease with the deletion of messages. I've had messages deleted, but my post count has never decreased. I'm afraid that based on this assumption it looks very much as if you fabricated your story in order to cause trouble. Still, at this point I can suggest two things: 1. Simply stop complaining. Petrosianic will likely drop the matter if you do. His "criminal" remark was simply a piece of "campaign humor," following octal's lead from the first page of this thread. 2. Post a "dummy-message." Have rondino note your post count, delete the message, and note your post count again. If it is the same, you've been lying. If it is different, maybe you haven't been.

You are calling Petrosianic accusing me of being a criminal to be humor.

But my response to you accusing me of being a troll asking you whether you are mad at me because I didn't put you on the poll is not humor but an accusation ???

I didn't accuse SteveK of anything. I just asked him what is my sin of being accused of being a troll other than supporting Topalov ? After all, I didn't accuse him of being a troll for supporting Kramnik???

Whether your reponse to me was intended to be humorous or not, it was an accusation. Your response to SteveK--"Is it such a big sin to be supporting Topalov that I should be called a troll for that ?"--suggests that he called you a troll because you support Topalov. This is reinforced by your last line, "After all, I didn't call you a troll for supporting Kramnik," which indicates that by following his reasoning you should call him a troll for supporting Kramnik. You're trying to backpedal just as you did after your earlier accusations.

But , he called me a troll. I didn't call him a troll.

That's irrelevant. He called you a troll because of your rampant trolling. You misconstrued this as him calling you a troll for supporting Topalov. Then you drew the fallacious conclusion that if you are a troll for supporting Topalov, then he could be called a troll for supporting Kramnik.