Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 08:27:45 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
Hi On June 26, 2001 at 11:03:20, Dann Corbit wrote: [snip] >If you leave then they win. Is that what you want? It's not really about winning or loosing is it? In a good (meaning useful) discussion, people first agree on the subject being discussed and agree on definitions of terms used within the discussion. While the subject in the latest battle^H^H^H^H^H^Hdiscussion was quite clear, the terms used were not. (ie what is meant with 'GM strength') In a good discussion, both sides should have the possibility to present their point of view and back them up with some data. (I don't mean a proof now if you can proof something it's fact, not an opinion) The result of a good discussion doesn't mean that one side "wins" and the other side is now convinced that they were wrong. Most discussions _I_ had end up with me still having the same opinion but understand the other point of view a bit better. There are others where I changed my mind in the end, and yet others where both changed their minds and came up with a 3rd opinion. That doesn't mean that both "lost". Last but not least respect towards the other is required in order to be able to listen to his/her arguments. If you think the other is an idiot you won't listen to his/her arguments. The "discussion" about "are comps GM strength" (and related threads) didn't show any of the aspects I mentioned above. Instead they reminded me of "throwing pie contests". Chris, I'm sad you've decided to no longer post in this forum. But then you're old enough to make your own decisions. <g> I wish you all the best. Sargon
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.