Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 18:39:08 01/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2002 at 21:29:13, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >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. Why? Taking this personally is silly. > >You are attacking Bruce's character and willingness to defend his >point, not rebuking his argumentation. > You have a vivid imagination. In no way am I attacking Bruce's his character. > 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 No I don't, I believe Ed Schroder rebuked Bruce's point convincingly. Terry
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.