Author: Chessfun
Date: 14:51:08 05/05/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 2000 at 04:33:19, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On May 04, 2000 at 18:45:32, Chessfun wrote: > >>Hi Dan, >> I also wonder about this. >> >>Seems coincidental that all the issues were very similar >>to Mogen's issues and my latter post declining to send him >>the games. > >Well, initially I wasn't going to respond to this as it's a somewhat ridiculous >post, but even lack of insight shouldn't go unmentioned. That isn't possible. >2) The test (although interesting) was too flawed and arbitrary to make any >useful conclusions about strength, which I (and others) have argued more than >once. This is the _real_ problem, and not time consumption. And that is your opinion. There are no _flaws_ there are points of discussion. >3) Regarding the special games I requested. I assumed that "anyone" meant >anyone, but that doesn't seem to be true (Hint: Sending them to Tony won't >help). I won't lose sleep over it. Ok tony then I won't send them. >4) If you can't stand critiscism, then don't speculate on the importance of the >games you post. I can stand critiscism when it is fai and impartial. Sadly that isn't the case. And I can speculate on anything I choose, you don't like it...... too bad. And I speculated on results not on posted games so let's at least get it right. >5) If someone disagrees with your viewpoints, then it's unwise to call them >argumentative and non-constructive. Using facts are much better, but I guess you >didn't have any. If someone disagrees they have the right to post their viewpoint. Viewpoint that is.....not stating it as gospel because they say so. >6) It's Mogens' not Mogen's, but I can live with that. Moq is also okay. No issue as this is the last thread I shall be talking to you in. >This more or less sums it up. I don't think there's anything left to be said >about this issue, not from me anyway. Yeah we shall see. >>It is a shame that IP's cannot be part of all posts that way >>at least we would know who is who and it would to some part >>decrease trolls like this thread. > >I agree. I believe that the truthfulness of identity is very important. > >>The IP issue I have raised before since if we all knew the >>IP of all posters then we would see how many names other >>people may have used. >> >>Steve, you have my permission to publish mine and any other >>that has been associated with it. >Same thing applies for me. Good, then I shall send an email to ICD requesting your IP and any other names associated with it, quoting this post. Requesting at the same time a note on any other names associated with mine. Assuming they reply I will post the reply here. Thanks.
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.