Author: Chessfun
Date: 09:39:02 04/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2001 at 11:03:04, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On April 19, 2001 at 20:45:21, Chessfun wrote: > >>What gave me the idea is you have been arguing that Shredder should be the >>only program to play the match with Kramnik. > >Then you haven't been reading very carefully and paying attention. I've written >several times that the only alternative to accepting Shredder as the obvious >candidate would be an open tournament/challenge. If that isn't possible then the >choice is obvious. Shredder. OK let's have a simple question and answer. Do you favor; a) Shredder should play b) A tournament/matches to decide You could of course still cloud it by saying something to the effect of it depends on whether it's called a World Title etc. But I'm hoping to understand as I have seen you post in favor of both. >>There is no indifference about not being overly concerned by details. > >You use indifference as a shield everytime one of your attempts to validate the >current arrangement is shot down in this forum. I might be indifferent, but there you are the only one arguing and arguing each side of the issue each time it suits you argument. As in DB being mentioned and not being specific as with the question above. >>You go the total opposite of it and critique every minor detail to the point >>that regardless of how it was set up you would still argue just for the sake of >>it. > >The details of the current arrangement are completely irrelevant, because its >premises are flawed from the start. Minor details are not very interesting. Premises are flawed again without saying which you are in favor of. >>IMO You don't care if the match takes place regardless of which program is >>chosen/selected as it holds little interest for you. > >That is correct, the event means very little to me. I'll watch it and probably >cheer for Kramnik, and that's about it. In all honesty, I could sit down and >watch the quarrel. > >But I _do_ care about fairness and I _do_ care about the programmers who feels >bypassed due to a obscure selection process out of principle. You don't care, be serious. You care more about arguing each side of the coin. Which programmers do you care about that feel they've been bypassed that can't make a case for themselves. Bob, Bruce, Christophe, SMK. Do you think they need you to make there case?. This statement indicates you are not in favor of a) above. Yet you have argued like that was what you favored. > Try putting >yourself in their position and try to focus on wishes different from your own. >That would do you good I think. LOLO I think the only thing that would do me good is giving up on threads like these :-) 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.