Author: Bella Freud
Date: 11:30:00 11/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 16, 1999 at 14:12:22, Pete Galati wrote: >On November 16, 1999 at 13:50:48, Bella Freud wrote: > >>On November 16, 1999 at 10:23:42, blass uri wrote: >> >>>I see sometimes things like these: >>>X insults Y and Y respond by insulting X. >>> >>>I think that this behavior is not productive. >>>I think that both sides should be warned not to do it. >>> >>>I think that criticizing behaviour of someone should be allowed only if it is >>>without bad language and based on proved facts. >>> >>>It is better before posting something negative about someone to send him(her) >>>an email to be sure that there is no misunderstanding. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Hi Uri, >> >>I don't know if you are talking about me. Perhaps not. >> >>I want to know why I am beign provoked elsewhere. >> >>Yesterday I had an email from Bruce that was an "official warning". Bruce said I >>should post on-topics. Bruce copied the email warning to the other moderators. >>Fair enough, I thought, if he felt this way. >> >>So I posted only on-topic. I made three on-topic posts and did not do anything >>else that Bruce could say was an attack. >> >> >>I posted this in reply to Ratko Atomic's post: >> >>---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>On November 15, 1999 at 17:36:28, Bella Freud wrote: >> >>[snip] >>> >>> >>>I consider it needs 24 hours to digest the true genius of your post. >>> >>>It generated in me an instant crystalisation of thought. Just by your inversion. >>>Chess programs are playing "negative" chess. They avoid obvious loss by ply N. >>>For them perfection is in loss avoidance (the not totally obvious opposite of >>>win seeking). Therefore no style, no plan, no class. Just dumb obstructionism. >>> >>> >>>Bella >>-------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >>I thought this post was entorely on-topic and fair thing to say. >>Then I got a reply to my post from the anonymous moderator "KarinsDad". >> >>This is his reply: >>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>I posted this same thought a few months back. Of course, my post was not as >>eloquent or well thought out as Ratko's. You must have missed it. I guess the >>idea is not that appealing to you anymore since I never contribute anything >>worthwhile. >> >>KarinsDad :) >>--------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> >>I think that the last sentence is a provocation. Or a troll. It is designed to >>get me to react. >> >>Why does an anonymous moderator do this? He must have read the "warning" from >>Bruce, and he must also have seen that I was making on-topic posts. >> >>So why is he trying to stir things up? >> >>It seems that there are some folk who don't like what I do, whatever I do, and >>who are trying to get me banned. Or is there some other wierd motive? >> >> >>Bella > >I don't think he was talking about you, Of couse he is talking about me. He replied to my post and said "you" twice. If it is not me then I am a Dutchwoman. > I won't mention the name of who I >beleive he was referring to because I don't want to argue with that person. > >I don't think that you are in any danger of being bannned, I got a private email from the anonymous moderator (KD) which told me to "get lost". He did *not* copy it to the other moderators. Very strange way to behave. My opinion. Bella I don't really notice >you causing any trouble, I can't say I understand what you were saying in your >post that you quoted above, but it does not appear very off topic to me, I've >been farther off topic than that, but I'm fortunate that people tend to ignore >me so it's probably easier for me to do that. > >Pete
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.