Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 11:10:08 05/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 18, 2000 at 13:38:21, Dann Corbit wrote: >On May 18, 2000 at 12:09:19, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>On May 18, 2000 at 11:08:59, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>Which is it? Is it both? Is it neither? >>> >>>I think it's both. >> >>I fail to see the bravery/cowardice issue. He is entitled to reject the >>participation of a computer program in his national championship, isn't he? > >*Why* do you think he is rejecting the option of playing? For the reasons he stated. Why should I interpret him? He opposed the participation of Fritz. Playing against it would be doing as told, against his own judgement. His privilege. >>Refusing to play Fritz is only being coherent and has nothing to do with being >>a coward, "play like a man" (other posts on this issue), etc. > >Coherent in regard to what? See above. > If someone decides not to play are you saying that >the decision is neither brave nor cowardly? Nothing to do with being a coward, a hero, a "man", a "sissy". >>I find this sort of >>macho talk more revelaing about the poster than about van der Sterren and >>Bosboom. > >What does it say about me then, if it is revealing? That you think in these terms. >>It reminds me of the pacifists that refused to go to war and were >>accused of cowardice. > >Then you think it is bravery. That's what I was wondering. Nope. I don't think that being a pacifist has anything to do with bravery or lack of it. Same applies to van der Sterren. Enrique
This page took 0.01 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.