Author: Mike Castañuela
Date: 10:53:03 06/09/99
Go up one level in this thread
No. I don't think is good your idea. I come to this forum by the sole purpose of read about computer chess (forum's name). I'm suscribed to others forums adequated to my others hobbies or interests. When ocassionally have born messages off topic (by example, and casually near to topic, e.g. chess simply, remember the tired Fischer and Kasparov threads?) the forum's atmosphere change to vicious and my interest to enter the forum decays. Is isn't good for the survival and growing of forum, no? Maybe others members feel the same. Maybe your idea is not so bad, but for sure very relaxed as moderator point of view. On June 08, 1999 at 14:20:39, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Hi Dan: >It seems to me that the kernel of our differences in this isue -and in fact of >me with the rest of all omin ees- is that I put more importance in the fact that >people is meeting here to talk chess computer than in the fact that computer >chess is here waiting to be talked about by people. If I come here, of course it >is because chess computer interest me and with all probability that will be the >content of almost all my posts, but I would want to be at easy with the >likelihood that maybe another issue can appear in the thread or along the >conversation with a guy without thinking some moderator is evaluating that as a >sin that maybe should be deleted. It is not I am asking to add new items to >this site, but let people the freedom to do that if they like, knowing in >advance that those off topic issues never will be so much as endanger the >purpose of this place. Once I started a thread with Dgeordge Vidanovic about >phylosophy if I not recall badly and that made room to be acquanted much better >wiht him and many things very important followed from that. And why we just does >not pursued that talking trhough email? Because part of the fun were the >comments of another people here. We just did not want to narrow the potential >scope of the conversation. You see, for me the intercourse is more important >that the content of it. In fact, onmce the intercoruse is fluid, the content >become more interesting. I have not enriched my life discussing about hash >tables, BUT talking about many things with peple that casually is interested, >like me, in a degree, in hashs tables. >I hope I make my position cristal clear. >fernando
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.