Author: Dirk Frickenschmidt
Date: 17:40:19 09/20/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 20, 1998 at 17:51:05, Detlef Pordzik wrote: Hi Detlef, I snip my post completely because you do not refer to it in concrete, but rather with the overall suspicion that it does not do justice to Thorsten Czub and perhaps is not helpful to find a way to peace. At least I guess that this is in plain words what you want to tell me. Correct me if I am wrong. >All this is amusing to read - at least above the surface. >If one'd insist more or worse, one could come to the conclusion, it'd be a >intelligent written flame against TC. If it were my intention to just write a flame against Thorsten Czub, I would have written that in plain words for sure. In fact I was rather desperatly trying to keep up some sense for humor and real satire instead of complaining heavily about the incredibly offensive style I met in some of his posts again and again. >A man, who polarizes, no doubts. From my view continuing primitive offensive style together with fundamentalist thinking categories of belief and disbelief - belief not in religious matters, but in "friend" and "enemy" concepts concerning chess programs, which are not remotely worth thinking in such categories or hurting others for such crap -, is much more a problem than just "polarizing", which can be said about some intelligent forms of critisism as well. >A man, who got his personal failiures, just like you'n me. perfectly true while still not at all being a general excuse for any kind of behaviour... >And most time the ghosts'll appear, you're shoutin' for - to use a German, >traditional. >But I'd like to take his part, a little - just from my very personal sight. Yes, ok with me. >I had close & very constructive contacts with the Author of the prog. Chris Wh., >after our personal quarrel concerning the prog >and I had basically the same with TC over the years, with several attacks >against me personally., as well. I once had nice contacts with Mr. Whittington as well, until I had the pleasure to meet some of his sides I had not known so well before. In the meantime I had more than one opportunity to get extremely well acquainted to them ;-) I know Thorsten since many years, and don't want to debate the reasons for my deep disappointment about his behaviour here in public. Be assured that I don't quit old relations for superficial reasons: Thorsten's is the only one of many which I had to quit since many years, and hopefully will remain the only one... I just can say: he stepped over the border of what I personally can accept as occasional struggle, very far, and I will not tolerate his offensive behaviour towards all kinds of people (including me) and matters any longer. I wrote a long appeal to him here on CCC, describing in a very concrete form what I do not find acceptable, after already having had some encounter with his less friendly sides shortly before, him then being completely unprovoked by me. His only reaction after my new appeal was his public claim to stop talking with me. Within days I now could easily add one more equally long list like this: with things absoluteley incompatible with the non-offensive character demanded as basical ground for CCC. Frankly, I have not seen any response from you to my "appeal to Thorsten". Nor to lots of his recent offensive posts: no response to loads of simply offensive (and not just "polarizing") stuff. Instead I now see something like a polite, but in its direction quite clear "appeal to Dirk" from you. ;-) But to be clear: I deny *anybody* the right to treat people like Thorsten *continually* does here on CCC in certain posts. If I am denying others the right to treat people witout any respect and hurting them again and again, this from my view has *much* more to do with my profession (which you allude to further down) than any irenic dreams of a peace which last not least lives from repressing and pushing away what is heavily going wrong, just to keep some harmonic feelings. >But - all this can be solved - peacefully - and TC, in person, is very well able >to say " I'm sorry " - if he reckognizes he's been wrong. I'm not interested any longer in shorttime excuses - missing even these in any clearly recognizable form from Thorsten lately. I am more interested in non-offensive posting on matters of computerchess over longer period. >One thing for sure, Dirk, and I ain't too sure, that you'd feel different, if >you were in the same position : > >I personally still call S.E. b+c " my " prog - eventhough I was only peripheral >involved in the eng. testing and helped a little to increase it; Sorry, I don't guess what S.E. b+c might be. But I still guess I wouldnd't call a program "our" program if I only helped testing it intensively and were not really able to contribute some program code... >TC was - as far as I know from Chris, THAT MUCH involved in the making of the >prog - even if he didn't write the codes, that I kinda respect this " we, our " >ect. I have a lot of respect for his testing. He did very much for the development of this program. Still I regard continuing (and not just occasional) talking in "we" form about a program from another programmer as slightly exaggerating, to say the least in a polite way :-) >Sometimes I see a worthwile to remember sentence here ( think, KK uses it ) : >....take it with a grain of salt...... - and a smile, a real ( ! ) one. See above: I could smile much more in a warmhearted context which I could regognize, even with some rough tones from time to time. Instead I have to recognize vain talking in connection with contemptive comments about others and their issues... >And remember what we all should do - you personally under all circumstances >( remembering your profession, or call it faith ) : > >who are you ( nicely : we ) to throw the 1st stone ?? I am not much interested in throwing any "first stone". Please feel free to show me where I have really been throwing a "first" stone. I am much more interested in stopping an arm which is obviously constantly (and sometimes for extremely cheap reasons) throwing stones at all kinds of others and their matters. I am well able to give you lots of examples for the latter. >To the topic, if it was the one : CSTal - >I bought it, I was a legal owner - and I disliked it - by various reasons. But >this was a personal decision of mine, nothin' to speak about in general. >Yet, absolutely true is : >there WAS a " paris Vs " - came along with the prog itself as an add. eng. >there was a " black + white .eng Vs " as well - quite a long time on the server. I am sorry this does not answer the simple and fundamental question: why is the definitely best version which is available not on the server now, nor can it be bought on disk or CD? And why can't anyone read some useful comment there, like "CSTal Black is no version for playing with black, but for computer games, while CSTal white should be used for games against humans"? Or even better rename the versions to make the whole thing understandable to customers? All very simple and fundamental. But a problem with Chris Whittington/Thorsten Czub or whomever? >IF you'd write a mail to them,, or phone Chris, you'd get your .eng Vs for >sure ! I asked Chris which version to use, on rgcc. I only got an agressive answer which had do do *nothing* with my question. Others perhaps have better chances... Of course I can get the version. But most customers can't in any convenient and usual way. >I wrote all this in a little " fear " - as I've read just today, TC got some >" yellow card ".........so we're about to loose one of them, who really gives it >all - for our hobby. If he got a yellow card - which I don't know - then certainly not for his nice attitude to "give it all - for our hobby". I guess, if he got a yellow card, this probably had other reasons... ;-) >maybe sometimes in a - very - specific + uncommon way, but remember : >TC has been + still is a very experienced, yet emphatic, tester with a huge >background of knowledge, concerning progs. I had and have a high esteem for Thorsten's experience and insights concerning computer chess - with the one exception where extreme feelings of love and hatred govern his judgements. I am sorry that the latter is becoming quite a habit more and more, sometimes shading the first to the degree of a total eclipse... >So, why not smile a little - show this attitude with " the salt thing " - your >letter was brilliant - but it contains them bad vibes wrapped in intelligent >phrases, that just shouldn't be. It may well be that my letter still vibrated from some "extremely" bad vibrations I had to read before, even if I tried to meet them with as much humor as possible... :-) >Nevertheless - just my opinion - and, of course > >a quiet, pleasant sunday > >ELVIS Conclusion: Elvis, believe me, I accept the questions you put to me in principle. I just have some difficulties with them because I find them a bit unbalanced concerning "rhyme and reason"... ;-) Being very clear in my answer and saying very directly what I don't like is not meant offensive towards you in any possible way. I just tried to answer your questions as good as I can. Kind regards from Dirk
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.