Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:24:23 10/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2000 at 00:51:01, Chessfun wrote: >On October 09, 2000 at 00:33:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: > ><snipped nonsense> > >You said I called you a liar first and that, that was the >first insult. That and that alone is now the issue. No... it is the issue _you_ want to make. I said that _you_ made the first insulting remark each time. You accused me of noplaying 1/2 the tiger testers. I responded. You said that there was no way I could have watched hundreds of beta tiger games (after I admitted that beta tiger was not gambit tiger). I responded. Each time I fired a strong response, it _was_ a response. I remembered the "liar" post as that was the longest single sub-thread in the argument. That started that problem. I didn't even remember the post you quoted until you tried to use it to prove I started things. But it contained an insult by yourself as well. Just look at how you write things directed to me. You will figure out why I don't like them. It has nothing to do with whether the question is stupid or not. Nothing to do with whether the question is about something I don't want to talk about or not. It is about the _way_ the question is asked. IE Have you ever beaten your wife? vs Do you still beat your wife? The former is distasteful. I would probably respond "no" and go on. The latter is an indirect accusation. I would definitely respond differently. You ask / make a lot of the latter. Otherwise, I am still waiting on the explanation for you noplay comment, along with some data to support making such a claim in public. your turn. > >Now you decide that saying 1/2 the computer accounts are >probably noplayed is an insult. > >Seems you are always twisting and turning looking to >turn any argument in your favor. Seems I just read what you post and draw a reasonable conclusion. Otherwise explain why your comment is _not_ an insult, and please provide some factual data to support the comment. I have asked for this before. So far you simply ignore it. We both know why. > >Sarah.
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.