Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 18:29:13 01/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2002 at 21:17:24, Terry McCracken wrote: >On January 16, 2002 at 21:00:59, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On January 16, 2002 at 18:18:49, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>Bruce can't you admit that in this case you may be wrong? >>>I believe Ed has more than proven his point. >>>Just my opinion. >> >>Bruce doesn't have to admit anything, he just disagrees with you. >> >>Is that so hard to handle? >> >>-- >>GCP > >Actually he disagrees with Ed, I concur with Ed's point. > >I felt Bruce may have been a bit too argumentative, and unwilling to >concede the point. > >So really, there's nothing for me to have to handle. > >I'm not sure of your reasons for your response? The sentence 'Bruce can't you admit that in this case you may be wrong?' annoyed the hell out of me. You are attacking Bruce's character and willingness to defend his point, not rebuking his argumentation. Your second post is another example of this: '...unwilling to concede the point'. Of course he not going to concede. He's arguing the opposite! You'll have to rebuke his points, not his willingness to state them. -- GCP
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.