Author: Hans Gerber
Date: 04:20:01 05/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 18, 2000 at 01:44:42, Ed Schröder wrote: >On May 17, 2000 at 20:31:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 17, 2000 at 20:05:55, Hans Gerber wrote: >> >>>I just want to inform you about the fact that I asked the moderators to judge >>>about your insulting article. You have by far overstepped the allowed behavior >>>of the charta of this group. Please try to argue with more respect for the other >>>human being. Please stop in special the insults against chessplayers. >>> >>>Thank you, >>> >>>Hans Gerber >> >> >>Feel free to complain all you want. >> >>I am reminded about a pot, and a kettle... > >Hans did nothing wrong. He asked questions (discuss a topic) you did >not like. In all the discussions it was Hans who stayed polite while >others (not only you) got irritated with your "go away" as highlight. > >Every member is entitled to have an opinion. If you don't like an >ongoing discussion an alternative is to not respond and then the >topic will fade away by itself. When I contacted the moderators one of them reacted this way. As if I had complained about what R. Hyatt might _think_ the moderator answered, he wasn't privy with what he might think but he thought that R. Hyatt only wanted to tell me that I would not see some important facts. But I have complained because R. Hyatt is attacking me with a language that is insulting. My opinions might be weak, they might be even wrong, but I don't want to be insulted to have the same "mindset" as Kasparov, meaning in the language of R. Hyatt that I am a "jerk". It seems as if R. Hyatt is the super moderator or leader of CCC since he can stamp members whose articles could be ignored. The strangest thing however is the accusation with fantasies about my name. It seems as if R. Hyatt is not willing to tolerate the writing of diverging opinions no matter how good they are founded. In the same impolite and aggressive behavior R. Hyatt talked to Adrien and others. Someone who has a different opinion than R. Hyatt must be prepared to take attacks and insults. > >Now concerning the topic itself: I don't know about the press conference >after game-2 but Kasparov told the NY times the very same day about his >suspicion. If you say such things to a journalist I would say that is >"public". Of course IBM and co had to react. I think the details are very important. For about a week I discussed with R. Hyatt about a "press conference after game two". He could never substantiate his statement. Recently R. Hyatt wrote that this has been wrong but that it wasn'zt "important". Now he hypostated that Kasparov was the first to go into the public with his accusations of cheating after game three. For me it is still unknown what had happened in private after game two. If he had asked for the prints and then was treated the way we know by now, Kasparov was not the one who started the psychowar. He did not talk about cheating in public although some (also M. Ashly) tried to bring him into such a wording. But it's a fact that the behavior of Tan was most impolite. You have made many events comparable to the event in 1997. I am sure that you understand my point. You can't invite GMs to play against your creation and then treat him _in public_ as if he was a "jerk". That simply doesn't make sense to me. The behavior of Kasparov, that was described in a report which was quoted yesterday, can not be understood if you don't think about events that happened between the second and the third game. I mean in private. Before we know more about the details we should not accuse Kasparov for anything wrong IMO. With Adrien and many others I find it extremely important that we here in a computerchess group don't treat chessplayers badly. Or we will have difficulties to have more GMs playing computers in their (the GMs!) tournaments. Hans > >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.