Author: blass uri
Date: 15:54:36 08/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2000 at 18:31:15, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On August 07, 2000 at 17:49:33, Alvaro Rodriguez wrote: > >>I´m not saying you are wrong though, but you understood it different that´s >>all...You and Uri maybe didn´t have the same english teacher in school :-) > >Yes, I understood it differently. I might have overinterpreted Uri's remark, but >I don't think so. Mainly because Uri has argued for readcount before. Even >though he won't admit it, he wants to apply value to messages based on the >number of participants. I add these factors together and reach a conclusion. I >find my conclusion to be correct. You're more than welcome to disagree. I'll >survive :o). I meant not to respond to your messages about this subject but I must make it clear that I thought to use read count to decide if a message is on topic or off topic in cases that it is not clear. This is not relevant to most of the subjects because in most of the cases it is clear to me if the subject is on topic or off topic. I also explained my opinion that the subject of chessmaster books was on topic. Uri
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.