Author: Bas Hamstra
Date: 02:41:35 01/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2002 at 16:18:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 15, 2002 at 15:46:29, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On January 15, 2002 at 15:15:55, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>On January 15, 2002 at 03:57:15, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On January 14, 2002 at 19:17:02, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hello , >>>>> >>>>>i see bookbuilder in cct4. that is an interface made by >>>>>Bas Hamstra sold to J.E.F. Kaan (who can't program at all) >>>>>and with crafty added sold as 'bookbuilder'. >>>>> >>>>>Now i see Jan Kaan join CCT4 with bookbuilder under the name 'djenghis 0.05'. >>>>> >>>>>He is mentioned as 'author' from Djenghis. >>>>> >>>>>This is not correct. >>>> >>>> >>>>Vincent, >>>> >>>>You impossibly can provide the evidence of your accusation, I suggest you move >>>>your suspect to the Tournament Director of CCT4, that is where it belongs. >>>> >>>>The moderators of CCC are not going to allow you to discredit the name of Mr. >>>>Kaan based on wild speculations. So it's either provide the evidence or stop >>>>now. >>>> >>>>Kindest regards, >>>> >>>>Ed Schroder >>>>CCC moderator >>> >>>With respect, I disagree with this. The factual accuracy of what someone is >>>saying shouldn't be an issue. The moderators should not be a court of law that >>>determined whether what someone says is true or false. >>> >>>"Put up or shut up" should be something the members say, not something the >>>moderators say. The club that the moderators wield is too heavy in this case. >>> >>>As a group, we need to be able to speak freely about issues that are important >>>to us. Sometimes, this might involve very contentious speech, which Vincent >>>seems to specialize in. >>> >>>I think that the charter is designed to protect us from stalkers and people who >>>can't stay within the bounds of civility. It's not designed to prevent us from >>>getting into arguments, disagreeing, or even accusing each other of things. >>> >>>I suggest that if Vincent makes a campaign out of this, it should go. If >>>someone is going to post the same thing every few days, they are obviously using >>>the forum as a vehicle for personal attack -- that's what a campaign is. I >>>don't see that happening here. >>> >>>If someone wants to say something nasty, I think they should go for it. I think >>>that the charter protects us from people would would follow us around sniping at >>>us, like the stuff that is happening in the other forum, but if someone is >>>displeased with someone, that's a valid topic. >>> >>>bruce >> >>I disagree >>We got a moderator email that asked to delete all the thread >> >>I thought to do it but it was not a clear case that I was sure to do it so >>I decided to discuss it with Ed and the decision was not to delete it. >>but to give Vincent a warning. >> >>My opinion is that people should not accuse each other by "facts" that they >>cannot prove and the question if the "facts" are right or wrong >>is not important. > > >I am with Bruce here. Discussions can be frank at times. But there is a >difference between someone stating a concern and giving reasons for it, and >for someone doing the same thing 20 times in a row. IE the previous group >of moderators tolerated quite a bit of this stuff from (say) chessbits or >whatever. But only to a point. Once a did to, did not discussion goes on >a while, it is time to end it. > >But discussing particularly sensitive issues here should be considered as >acceptable so long as it doesn't resort to name-calling/insults. Being >concerned about a brand new program from an unknown author is certainly quite >reasonable in light of past happenings related to my program. I think it has >already died down nicely of its own accord without needing any moderator >intervention at all. > >If we only allow provable "facts" here, it will become quite useless, quite >quickly, for quite a lot of folks... Vincent simple has something personal against Jan Kaan (I know this for a fact) and tries to discredit him. This is not the first time he tries to discredit him in public, you know. I am surprised you have this opinion. When I was once pissed at Vincent and wrote *one* poinsonous mail (without any direct insults) it was instantly deleted by Uri Blass, because he labelled it a "personal attack". And these smearing campaigns are allowed??? Come on, a little consistency... Bas Hamstra.
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.