Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Now it's clear that Ritter Rost's post is not a fake

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 07:40:19 04/12/00

Go up one level in this thread


On April 12, 2000 at 00:24:34, Tom Kerrigan wrote:

>On April 11, 2000 at 22:09:06, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On April 11, 2000 at 17:45:59, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>>
>>>I think we've said what we're going to say about the judgment issue. I think I'm
>>>right, you think you're right. Fine. It was the moderators' call to make, maybe
>>>we made the wrong one, oh well.
>>>
>>>What you still haven't answered to my satisfaction is this: if the situation was
>>>so clear to you, why didn't you say anything?
>>>
>>>I was trying to determine RR's identity for probably 24 hours. You're saying
>>>that his identity (i.e., not Ossi) was clear to you immediately. So what were
>>>you doing the whole time? Were you thinking something like, "I know who RR
>>>really is, and the moderators don't, and they're making a big mistake, ha ha!"
>>>In other words, do you really like having big arguments with me more than you
>>>like to help your fellow man? Consider that a rhetorical question if you want.
>>>
>>>-Tom
>>
>>
>>It is easy to answer:  (a) I was a moderator for an extended period of time.  It
>>was time-consuming to handle the complaints;  (b) I handle about 100 emails per
>
>Right, but you're not a moderator now. So that's not really a reason not to make
>a complaint.
>
>>day now, that takes a lot of time;  (c) by the time _I_ read the post, you had
>
>So you "handle" 100 e-mails per day. What does this matter? Does that somehow
>make writing a short e-mail really hard?

It means (a) I am busy and (b) you had already read the thing and responded,
so it was obvious you had seen it.  I couldn't imagine _anybody_ not knowing
that posting private email is wrong.



>
>>already read it and responded to it.  I assumed a little bit of knowledge about
>
>So I read and responded to it. But you say you knew I was making a mistake.
>What's to keep you from e-mailing the moderators and saying, "hey, you're making
>a mistake." The mistake could easily have been corrected with your input, but
>you obviously elected to complain about bad decisions instead.

Didn't someone post a response to you that said just that?  Again, I don't
'duplicate' if I can help it, as it wastes time.



>
>As for the rest of your post, I don't care. Like I said, you have your opinion,
>I have mine. Please drop it instead of repeating yourself. I can read just fine.
>
>-Tom

This isn't about opinion.  This is about something that is either right or
wrong.  In this case, _wrong_.  posting private email is _wrong_, period.   No
opinion wanted or needed there.



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.