Author: Albert Silver
Date: 21:11:01 04/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 26, 2001 at 18:30:35, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>Your heart is in the right place, but I don't want to deal with Chris anymore
>after having had to deal with the kind of stuff he's been up to for the past few
>years.
>
>If someone else wants to deal with him, no problem. Feel free to run for
>moderator on the "we need a fresh dose of Chris" platform.
>
>But I don't want to have to deal with men who pretend to be women, then write
>moderator email complaining about sexism and "hierarchism" in responses to their
>posts.
<Gawk> Wow. That's so absurd, I can only presume you're dead serious and that it
happened. If he made you go through that, then that is some SERIOUS B.S. Sorry
to hear about that Bruce, that's really harsh.
Albert
>
>I don't care whether someone who does this is a programmer or not, and it
>doesn't have anything to do with the on-topic stuff he writes. It's sad that
>someone who could write good on-topic posts is pathological, but it's not my
>fault that this is true.
>
>You know how much time the Bella Freud incident cost me? I ended up writing 56
>emails, who knows how many posts, and I spent a lot of time away from my
>computer trying to figure out how to deal with that. It was really annoying.
>
>That's just me. Many others had to write me emails that I had to read and
>respond to. Many others had to read what I wrote, and perhaps do something.
>For example, when Bella was suspended, it immediately came back with a different
>alias, so Tim had to get involved in order to try to prevent that from happening
>again.
>
>That was just Bella Freud. We've also had Herman Hesse, Jonathan Smith, and who
>can even remember what else. I know you thought that you had Rolf after you at
>one point, but that was Chris, too.
>
>If someone wants to rehabilitate Chris, by all means let them try. It won't be
>me. I am not so gullible that I'd put him in a position to make a fool out of
>me, and even if I were, I don't have the time and energy to put into making it
>happen.
>
>bruce
>
>On April 26, 2001 at 16:08:59, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>
>>IMO you cannot solve a conflict with both sides
>>arguing:
>>
>>i am right. you are wrong.
>>
>>no. you are wrong. i am right.
>>
>>this does not help anyway...
>>
>>instead we could see it the following way:
>>
>>chris has been thrown out.
>>
>>i don't care if he wants in or not.
>>but when he posts, i would appreciate that he can post with his name.
>>so that anybody knows WHO is the xyz that has posted this or that.
>>thats the main problem with an anonymous post: you don't know who
>>is the guy you don't like.
>>
>>look. if chris was once a chess programmer, i think he has the right
>>to get an account here. and he has maybe the right to fuck off
>>when he wants. and come maybe back in a few years.
>>
>>i don't think he is out for pissing on people.
>>
>>we are all pissed off from time to time.
>>and in other times, we are very nice and kind and do senseful things.
>>
>>but we should not, try to seperate people out only because we have different
>>opinion.
>>
>>i would fight for bob, in the same way i would fight for chris or bruce,
>>i would fight for frederic to get his account back, and of course for amir.
>>i know that mogens is different opinion than i am, or chessfun.
>>but i would not like to see somebody throw them out.
>>
>>because computerchess would be boring when only ONE point of view is posted.
>>or only ONE opinion is there.
>>
>>i do not believe that computerchess will make progress when there is only
>>the political correct way to do it.
>>
>>isn't it democracy to fight for the right of your opponent ?
>>when i feel that ossi weiner is right, and his enemies are wrong,
>>i say so. if he says something i don't like, i say so.
>>same counts for any other.
>>
>>i am not biased for ONE person or against ONE person in general.
>>if somebody is discriminated for his personal ideals and point of views,
>>the whole group and the whole community is shit.
>>
>>
>>tolerance is no one way street. not only the individual has to be tolerant.
>>also the group has to be tolerant.
>>
>>are'nt we humans. can't we forgive ?
>>i can forgive even my deepest enemy. cause he might be an enemy, but he is still
>>a human beeing and all human rights count for HIM too.
>>
>>so i don't see the problem. instead of arguing if somebody is right or not,
>>just give him what he wants, and thats it.
>>
>>if somebody is hungry, i give him to eat. if somebody wants something to drink,
>>give it to him. if somebody wants to come in, let him.
>>
>>i do not really see the problem. i think there is a kind of host-rules.
>>
>>one of these rules is: try to be a human beeing.
>>
>>in german (dialect from where i come from): "bleiben'se mensch!"
>>
>>
>>of course when somebody on your party is pissing on all people all the way,
>>i will throw him out. but i don't think chris is this kind of person.
>>i was on his birthday in england. it as very funny, like a peter greenaway
>>movie. a little bourgeois. but --- over all very nice.
>>
>>i want to see him back. not because he has similar ideas i do have. but because
>>he has done a good job with cstal, and he is sometimes very funny and
>>good in making ideas and points clear.
>>
>>i don't see him as a plague of this forum, like tueschen was for rgcc.
>>
>>he is a chess programmer, and he has IMO the same right as marty hirsch or
>>mark uniacke or christophe theron or ed schroeder or bob hyatt or bruce moreland
>>or stefan meyer-kahlen has, the right to be in a group of other
>>chess programmers. all the gossip that people spread is unimportant for me.
>>for me counts in the end, how his chess program is.
>>
>>you have to see the personal stuff and the chess program.
>>i can be FOR chrilly donninger but against his pre-processing nimzos.
>>and i can be FOR nimzo when the program plays better chess.
>>i like e.g. don daily, because he is a nice guy and gives something to
>>computerchess. i know many others too that have the same thing for me.
>>they make my day very interesting. chris is in this group.
>>i like to read his posts, especially when these posts are not too agressive
>>but interesting as the moves of cstal have been.
>>
>>i like to read from others too. we once had interesting discussions in rgcc
>>about so many things. i don't know why this is impossible here.
>>
>>where does all the hate and fear come from ?
>>
>>there is nothing to lose.
>>we are ONE community.
>>
>>no matter if you are tarrasch, lasker, steinitz or capablanca.
>>no matter if you are morsch, whittington, lang or meyer-kahlen.
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.