Author: Peter Davison
Date: 11:04:35 09/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 08, 2000 at 11:44:18, Eelco de Groot wrote: >On September 07, 2000 at 12:31:10, Mogens Larsen wrote: > >>On September 07, 2000 at 12:15:08, Peter Davison wrote: >> >>>The forum referred to _is_ the people. It is not a forum, it is a club. >>>Different. >> >>Correct, but implied in my message. >> >>>If you said the people were inclined already to be disinterested in everything >>>unless there was something to be gained, that the 'gain' took the form of >>>positive advantage for oneself, or negative disadvantage for the 'opponent', in >>>classical chess zero-sum style, then I would agree with you. >> >>That was what I was trying to say in not so many words. >> >>>If you see this, then why are you here? >> >>For the same reasons as you are, I imagine. Observing (and laughing). >> >>Mogens. > >I hope that I know the both of you just a little bit better than that you both >didn't really mean to sound so cynical, shallow and negative about the people >here, their intentions and their capacity for independant thought. If not then >as just an average CCC-member I tend to feel insulted by the tenor of this >sub-thread. > >Thank you very much, >Eelco From the changed thread title (and some other stuff elsewhere) it appears there's confusion as to what a "two-player zero-sum game" actually is. From that one can deduce there would be confusion about what is a "non-zero-sum game". This bit ">>>If you see this, then why are you here? >> >>For the same reasons as you are, I imagine. Observing (and laughing). " is a positive non-zero outcome. To Mogens's eternal horror no doubt, it indicates a little personal bond. He is dissatisfied also.
This page took 0.01 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.