Author: Pedro Gomes
Date: 08:49:34 02/26/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 26, 2006 at 10:23:46, Charles Wane wrote: >On February 26, 2006 at 08:46:40, Peter Skinner wrote: > >>On February 26, 2006 at 08:29:15, Charles Wane wrote: >> >>> Well a Sherry Windsor never attacked a person when she said Hiarcs Sucks and >>>was banned, so I don't understand, your banning seems selective. By the way I'm >>>sure you are aware that the term sucks is used in Everyday english in america. >> >>Well Charles, >> >>You obviously do not understand the meaning of destructive speech. >> >>Saying something sucks and providing no data to support it is a troll. Saying >>something sucks and providing data to back up your claim is something entirely >>different all together. > > > > Peter this is crazy, surely you are more intelligent then this? Are you telling >me that sherry was banned cause she had a negative opinion about a program but >did not back it up with facts??? You can't be serious here. You appear to be >saying that the term "sucks" in itself was not bad, but the fact that Sherry did >not provide proof. This is on a whole new level of adsurdity . I think half the >post here should be deleted if that's your criteria for banning people. No way >you can label "Hiarcs sucks" as a personal attack. I do believe people have a >Right to express a strong opinion, with or without proof. Sorry I just can't buy >this as a reason for you deleting Sherry's post. I think Peter is right. If commercial propaganda is not allowed, then commercial anti-propaganda also should be banned. So, if you attack a commercial program without data that support your claims, than you may be doing an anti-propaganda of a commercial software, which is not allowed by chart. HFP
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.