Author: Peter Davison
Date: 13:36:33 09/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 07, 2000 at 16:23:49, Marc van Hal wrote: >How do I have to see my work >Some people here said the said something and later on had to take there words >back >I have never come in such a position >But if there is something seriouly wrong with it I am sure you should have >written about it >Lets face it this site is highly critical. (Me included) >But actualy my question is in wich kind of catogery you think I belong in >acording to anelyzes and give an example >a)bad >B)average >c)great >d)super >e)Extreem The content is (a-b), bad to average, the style is (d-e), Super-extremely great. Overall tending to (e), since style is everything. Content just disappears into the archived black hole. You will be remembered. You can even exit winning (which is everybody's ambition). It's their inability to exit on a resounding win that drives the older ones. Think about. > >It is because indeed I think I am verry good in this why I made all my postings >To contribute something of importance to chess and not to my ego (ok also to my >ego but not on the first place) >If it is so many people say I am not verry good in what I do I won't post here >any more cause then it only takes webpage room >like some other people do here ( I won't metion any names but ok) >For those who came up to build a webpage I am already busy with that for a long >time but every time stop (when it comes to my mind Why should I build a webpage >ffor my self ? or are there enough people intrested) >The reason also why I am depressed that instead of becoming an einselganger I >would find someone to cooperate with (I tried to this with James Robertson I did >send him the database of many of my anelyzes and kept hin up to date with new >ones or refound ones >And start anelyzing many other games (in that time he told me that he had found >someone to generate a book with) >Maybe in the near future someone could help me with some plans to create on my >webpage > >But all the sudden didn't here anything anymore from him >And then seeing they prefer someone who is not highly enough qualefied for the >work instead. >Also what I wrote about the fact the I some times have to laugh that computer >programs get beaten by anelyzes from me by a GM is not only laugh but actualy >laughing like a farmer with a thoothegg (Dutch verb) > (I rather would have seen these anelyzes in the openings books from these >computer programs instead) > >And indeed Mogens I am extremely disapointed I was neglacted by Schroder BV >cause I see to many people becomming a betta tester who never contributed >something of importance and later asume they are some great personelety because >the fact they are betatesters. >And again not for myself in the first place but for the sake of the program >(where Rebel 10 came closer to be a great program Rebel Century did fail >Also this is Why I prefer Junior6 most to make my anelyzes now best of it is the >learning methode) > >At last Come won't go to heaven because for sure he is betting on the wrong >gods. > >Maybe some peopel again will think I blow to high from the tower but this is to >point out my ideas athoughts better >Marc van Hal
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.