Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 05:18:37 05/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 07, 2000 at 07:55:21, Walter Koroljow wrote: Hey Walter, >Mogens, > >The accusations I was talking about were the implications of bad behavior, not >the discussions of methodology. I will not enumerate them as that would make me >an accuser also! Okay, I understand now :o). I've certainly been guilty of unfair accusations (shenanighan's, biased and then some) but it seemed true at the moment. This was due to the lack of Methodology and a lack of explanation. I'm sorry about remarks of that kind, but in the heat of battle... >The second thought is that in spite of these difficulties, there are CCC members >who go to substantial trouble and do original work (such as Chessfun). The >posts of their results have much higher signal-to-noise ratio than my posts. I >value their contributions and would like to encourage them to continue making >this a better place! I value their contributions even if I can find some flaws >in their methodology. This basic appreciation (I assume others feel it also) >has a way of getting lost in discussions, and the focus shifts from the >contribution (the major factor) to a -perhaps minor- flaw in methodology. I agree, but it should be possible to discuss aspects of the performed tests. >Cheers, > >Walter Thanks Walter. Sincerely, Mogens Chr. Larsen http://home1.stofanet.dk/Moq/ "If virtue can't be mine alone, at least my faults can be my own."
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.