Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 11:57:05 04/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 2001 at 08:15:56, William Musson wrote: >Ok, so what is clear? Let's state the obvious. > >This is a computer chess board. The majority liked on-topics are technical, hash >tables and stuff; games and results; which program is strongest. right. >There is a limited space for the 'politics' of computer chess. right. >What drives the majority crazy is extended, unsolveable political conflict. The >rights and wrongs of going to Jakarta; the rights and wrongs of censorship; >endless disagreement over who gets to play Kramnik. right. >When rgcc disintegrated in 1997, there were two strands of thought. One was to >create a moderated technical computer chess forum (rec.games.chess.programming), >the other to create a moderated technical and political combined chess forum >(CCC). >CCC was what happened and has shown that the idea of combining political and >technical together such that political occupies substantial space doesn't work. >The majority don't like it. Most of the programmers don't like it. A little is >ok, but too much is too much, is the view. yes. this might be. >I take a completely different view. The techniques side of things is 'been >there, done that', boring for me. The unsolvable political conflict, that people >don't agree, that that have wildly differing opinions and why, that no synthesis >is possible, I find quite fascinating. as i am not a programmer i do not profit much from technical posts that is not explaining things to me. >What is clear is that trying to force a political space onto a majority that >doesn't want it is not effective. Finding weakness and anomolies in the opposing >position and working on ways to expose those anomolies appears to make 'logical >and rational' sense, but, if people don't want it; they are not going to accept >the 'logic'. right. >Getting round bans by creating an alias account gets cited as evidence for more >ban, so that doesn't help create political space either - probably it just >closes it down further. right. maybe. >Ultimately it is only computer chess and doesn't really matter. It is hardly >Bosnia, or Kosovo or even a foot-and-mouth epidemic. I stopped looking at chess >source code more than 18 months ago. I sold the business 12 months ago; I no >longer should have anything more than a passing residual interest here, sparked >off this time by the Kramnik situation, in which I could get all puffed up on a >told-you-so, they're-all-devious-crooks agenda. I should have just stayed out. >When I was 'in' computer chess - the issues seemed important to me. Now I'm not, >so, the conclusion is obvious. hm. >To Ed: I'm sorry our friendship fell apart in 1997. 'Internet' friendships are >pretty fragile things and don't survive storms. but there is not only internet. we are real existing persons. and we know each other very good. for years. it should be possible for anyone of us to go one step into the direction of the other side. >To Bruce: Internet enemyships are very stable, well reinforced by storms. I can >understand that the Bella Freud fake blew out of control, and that you, through >no fault of your own, felt personally humiliated. That wasn't my intention, the >idea with her was to survive a little longer before the off switch got pressed, >but I apologise for the unintended grief you got on your personal space. > >I hope the rest of enjoy your computer chess. i am astonished about your human reaction. maybe this brings us all one step into the right mood. >Meanwhile, outside my office window are the chickens. One cockerel is trying to >kill the other one uff. and I thought animals are peaceful... :-)) > (actually his own father). oops ! >Every day I go chase them with a >stick - they stop, but then start up again later. reminds me on something. >If they really can't live >together we normally solve it by taking one of them and losing him in the woods. >Always the father - we keep the son, until next year, and so the cycle >continues. The remaining chickens remain oblivious to it all, and it keeps us in >eggs. you throw the father into the woods ?! and ? what happens to it ? suicide ? will it survive ? >A little further away on some waste land are a group of feral cats. The Tom >marks out his territory by spraying all over it. He can tolerate the occasional >other Tom spraying, he just comes and sprays in the same area himself. What he >can't tolerate is another Tom spraying everywhere on the same territory. Another >territory, no problem, but not his. aha. chickens and cats. spraying their marks arround. sounds very similar to humans... >And I hope the Kramnik drama goes off peacefully. Try not to get too worked up >about it. i have my tournament. till later chris. they have deleted your account again ?! hm. resistance is futile ! the borg. :-))
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.