Author: Ralf Elvsén
Date: 18:12:53 07/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 06, 2000 at 20:54:28, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >On July 06, 2000 at 20:00:34, Ralf Elvsén wrote: > >> >>Maybe it wasn't the mentioning of CW that was the tricky part? Maybe >>it was your use of a description of a mental disorder to describe >>your contempt for him that was objectionable, and that alone would have >>caused "someone" to ask for your post to be removed, regardless of >>the victim of your fury? > >Fury is somewhat overstated :), there are more important things in life to rage >fury over, and CW is certainly not in that league. > >The fact that CW is not able to defend himself here anymore(directly)lays more >weight in the scale for me for removing a posting than people complaining in >anonymity about a lack of political correctness or becuase of oversensitiveness >on their side. > >My description of CW might have been harsh, and hard to swallow, but not >derogatory. I haven't noticed any comtempt in my deleted post, as I didn't have >contempt for him. His acting here and on internet are sad to see and pathetic, >and are supported by the fact that a board CCC is not willing to tolerate his >posting here, and his scattered postings on usenet always leads to fights. > >Giving a judgement about someones intellectual capabilities is something >completely different than saying someone is a bad individual. > >Many participants here have a problem with distinguishing between those two. As >I am not the standard for CCC behaviour, I should have taken that into account. > >Sorry Ralf, your exegesis of my post was very kind, yet it doesn't descibe what >I had in mind :) > >Jeroen ;-} Hi, Jeroen. I don't want to start a long discussion about this. I see I managed to choose my words poorly, this late at night. Forget "fury". What I don't understand is 1) "complaining in anonymity" . We are supposed to use moderator email, yes? To aviod these kind of stupid discussions... But I had the grace to give myself away anyway, didn't I? 2) "political correctness or becuase of oversensitiveness" If you knew me, I don't think you would call me "politically correct". I don't consider myself oversensitive either. It was your colorful scene with a autistic that gave me a bad taste in the mouth. I don't care a fig for CW. I just think that people who are unfortunate to suffer from mental disorder should be spared the "privilage" to be used as means to make fun of chess programmers :) Peace? Ralf
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.