Author: KarinsDad
Date: 08:11:24 06/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 2000 at 07:29:36, Hans Gerber wrote: >On June 27, 2000 at 17:19:19, KarinsDad wrote: > >>On June 27, 2000 at 08:51:24, Hans Gerber wrote: >> >>[snip] >>> >>>I agree with you that until these questions have not been answered the whole >>>debate here in CCC is uninteresting. On the other hand I find it not fair if >>>some people always repeat the same stuff to spoil Kasparov and his integrity. >>> >> >>I have stayed out of this debate for the most part, but I think I will make a >>comment on this. >> >>I cannot decide (for my own opinion) whether Kasparov has great integrity since >>he sticks to his guns with his innuendos about cheating even though his position >>looks weak, or if he has a chink here in his armor concerning the DB team which >>prevents him from admitting that he is probably mistaken. >> >>If he is not mistaken, then it is a matter of sticking to his guns because he is >>correct versus not sticking to to his guns since he has no proof. A man with >>high integrity could pick either position. >> >>I have a feeling that it is somewhere in between all of these. Probably >>something of Kasparov getting the impression of cheating during the games and >>being unable to shake that impression (i.e. in denial), regardless of lack of >>proof. This would not imply that he is not a man of integrity, rather it would >>imply that he is human. >> >>It's unfortunate that the controversy started in the first place since I have >>great respect for both Kasparov and the DB team. >> >>In any case, it is now a relatively moot point. >> >>KarinsDad :) > > >So we can't be absolutely sure about what it is. In this case would it be not >careful if we avoided to call him jerk, liar and such things? > >But the main question for me is why the DB team let him believe he was possibly >cheated although they could have communicated and shown that all was quite >normal? It all boils down to the very actual question of how people in >computerchess should treat the chessplayers? In science it is absolutely normal >to treat your testing person with utmost friendliness and respect. Not because >scientists are Saints but simply because they want to have proper data. >Excuse me if it could sound as if I wanted to teach you such trivialities. But >it is often forgotten that the DB team was a team of scientists. > > >Hans Gerber Actually, I think that the term scientist is a little overused here. A team of engineers may be a slightly more accurate description. And to tell you the truth, I have seen ALL types of engineers in my day; from saints to sinners; and the bottom line is that no matter what anyone does, there will always be someone else complaining about it. Yet another part of the human equation. KarinsDad :)
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.