Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 14:49:09 10/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 24, 2000 at 15:04:19, Mogens Larsen wrote: >Your comments have undoubtedly had a great impact. Who can live without knowing >the style of play of your own program and hidden features. Nothing so far has >convinced me about your analytical skills. There hasn't been anything in your >messages so far to reveal anything extraordinary. right. how can i convince a genius ?! btw: i don't think it is my special job to enlighten you. as a genius you should have better things to do than to dialogue with a religious-man - don't you think so ?! :-)) >My chess analytical skills are very limited. I have no problems admitting that. >Fortunately this means that I can recognize others with the same lack of >knowledge, eg. you. Takes one to know one as the saying goes. it has nothing to do with chess. just with how much someone is used to do something. >I'm sure they are quite clueless about all the features you add all by yourself. >If someone told me that my program was capable of planning, I would be >astonished too. Unfortunately, it isn't correct just the same. :-)) >This explains why cheerleaders are so popular I guess. :-)) guess cheerleaders have some more meet at the right place to give... >Of course not, that would be in contrast to the definition of friendship. >Something just as important is honesty and integrity. IMO you lack both, but >that's just my opinion. I have a hunch you disagree :o). of course i lack both. i cannot be that perfect as you are, how can somebody be as perfect as you are , mogens ? this is one reason i do always think you should buy a chess-base product. to be insulted by you seems pretty much like a compliment for me, after all i read from you. continue. but be prepared that i will complain to the moderators about your behaviour that is against the charta. >In this case the fast prophet is an inaccurate one as far as I, and most likely >a few other, can tell. :-))) guess those people are as intelligent as you are. brilliant. then we can be sure everything is perfectly well. >If you followed your own advice then we wouldn't be having this discussion. >Allowing you to spread falsehood would just encourage everyone else, which is >why I bother posting replies. But don't worry, I'll leave you alone for now. you are the cyber-police here, sounds very prussian. germany has quite a nice history in controlling who is allowed to "spread falsehood" and who not. are you sure you are danish ?! >I have several very nice winning games with Gandalf. Some containing nice >attacks, some with exquisite positional play and some caused by horrendous >tactical blunders. aha. is it too much asked to present those computerchess games in this forum or do you want to talk more about your genius features ? >Luckily, I'm smart enough not to post one or the other, claiming to see >something that others can't. you don't want to talk about computerchess, right ? this is ONE reason you have a forum called the almighte forum for everything, because you don't really want to talk about computerchess. i think i begin to understand how your live works. >My advice to you would be to do the same. You >probably won't, but the advice is good nonetheless. >Mogens. you will not be so stupid to do what i want, he ? you are very clever mogens. has anyone before told you so ? i mean: in public ?
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.