Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 16:03:30 01/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 14, 2000 at 16:12:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 14, 2000 at 14:22:08, george petty wrote: > >>On January 14, 2000 at 13:18:37, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On January 14, 2000 at 12:17:49, Pete R. wrote: >>> >>>>On January 14, 2000 at 03:21:14, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>> >>>>>>Posted by Robert Hyatt on January 13, 2000 at 23:31:57: >>>>> >>>>>[ snips ] >>>>> >>>>>>There are some things above that are very suspicious. At the top of the >>>>>>response, he directly quoted Hsu. But after the beginning, no more quotes >>>>>>to support his less than savory description of Hsu's actions. I find this >>>>>>troubling. If he would quote him at the beginning, then couldn't he quote >>>>>>some of his "belligerent" comments as well? >>>>> >>>>>Maybe Mr. Williams has manners? >>>> >>>>Maybe so, maybe not. I don't know either party, but frankly I find his letter >>>>insulting and in poor taste. Not only that but it's defamatory, while Hsu's >>>>letter is not. I don't know Hsu from Adam, but Mr. Williams' letter clearly >>>>paints his character in a bad light and tries to sway the reader that he is some >>>>sort of jerk. His only defense against a lawsuit Hsu could bring for this would >>>>be the truth, i.e. he has to support his statement that Hsu's emails were >>>>belligerent and threatening, and support his interpretation that he was going to >>>>make comments on Kasparov's behalf, and so forth. The reader can't decide >>>>unless the emails are published. And I agree with Dr. Hyatt that it's >>>>suspicious already that Mr. Williams does not already support this with >>>>quotations. If I were Hsu, and *if* Hsu is innocent of the behavior painted by >>>>Mr. Williams, the next phone call Mr. Williams would get would be from my >>>>lawyer. You are free to have an opinion as to the relative character of Mr. Hsu >>>>vs. Mr. Williams, but it would be wiser to refrain from public comment, though >>>>that choice is yours. Personally I would like to see the email exchange myself >>>>rather than rely on other people's opinions. >>> >>>Instead of a big scientific discussion, what about a short >>>buiseness discussion? >>> >>>Sure, personally i would LOVE such a match happening. However i can't >>>afford Kasparov and i clearly realize that. I can't afford a single GM >>>even. I'm lucky some play a few blitz games against it at the internet. >>> >>>Now we see a person called Hsu. Why not first make a program, >>>start hacking it up to the internet, then start thinking of these things? >>> >>>Kasparov gets questions like this every day: "let us sign some contracts, >>>then i go try find some money with your signature". >>> >>>Perhaps 10 times a day? >>> >>>Sure not every day from Hsu, but Kasparov is a professional chessplayer, >>>not a professor who is there to do research and help students. >>> >>>I'm sure Hsu can dedicate easily another 6 months to building *a* machine. >>>In a letter Hsu says he doesn't need more money to make it even. excellent. >>> >>>Then he can show something. In USA internet is for free in contradiction >>>to europe. for a few dollar he can hack it up to the internet chess >>>server, i'm sure of that. >>> >>>A promise IBM has never kept, probably fearing other computers. >>> >>>Now then he has something to show his sponsors >>> >>> - i've got a machine >>> - see how it plays >>> >>>Right now he can only show a bit of dusty paper. >>> >>>First play a cheap 2700+ GM for example. Now IF it wins, then go on >>>and try to achieve the big price. >>> >>>Of course if Hsu doesn't believe in his new machine he sure won't play >>>other GMs. >>> >>>Vincent >> >> EXCELLENT!! I wish I had said that. Very good. >> >> Best wishes, >> >> George > > >Here is a suggestion: If you don't have anything to add, please don't post >"I agree" or "I wish I had said that". It only wastes bandwidth downloading >the headers for threading, and then reading a bunch of quoted stuff with nothing >new at the end. > >Nettiquette suggests that this is a newbie practice that should be avoided. Saying "I agree" (or so) is also an opnion and therefore is of value. Not so? Ed
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.