Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 12:15:27 04/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 2002 at 14:55:48, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 14, 2002 at 14:45:23, John Merlino wrote: > >I find this case just too obvious. He's not only asking >for a flamewar this Lagerhausen, even worse, he started >one. I agree that his posting was inflammatory, but the only one decides whether there is a flamewar or not is YOU. Even worse, if you feel it is a personal attack, DO NOT EVER reply. The other people who read it can make up their own mind whether Thomas has an argument or whether he is insulting you. Do you think Thomas insulting you will make people get a different opinion about you or about Thomas? I know for myself it would be the latter. (but I don't think he insulted you) If someone posts 'Diep sucks', *do* *not* reply. We can make up our own mind wheter it's right or not. I can assure you all posters you might care about on this board will only make a conclusion about the person that posted it, and not about Diep. >I explained my point But you only did so _after_ Thomas made his complaint. I would assume that after your explanation Thomas no longer feels your statement was worthless because it was unfounded. He might not agree with the arguments, but he can no longer complain about the lack of them. >I can understand why, but if a reaction to a posting in this >area is just intended to start a reaction from my side which >has *nothing* to do with computerchess, then it's obvious >it is off-topic. > >A moderator SHOULD understand that!!! I assume his post was a request to you for founding your statement. If you want to read more into it, don't. Some people aren't very good at stating things in a subtle way. I know a FIDE Master that wrote a strong chessprogram that isn't, either. -- 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.