Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 12:25:50 04/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 2002 at 15:00:38, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>What he is saying is: 'Vincent, I think your argument that he >>knows nothing about computerchess is meaningless because it is >>unfounded and you regularly use it without substantial evidence to >>support it. So I, and possibly other persons don't find it a >>convincing argument.' > >He didn't say that. He said: > >"Tell us Vincent.Is this your standard sentence to guarantee that you are >always right? I can remember you use it quite often against several different >people.Not very charming and serios." > >That's completely different. Sure, it's less subtly stated, and more inflammatory, but IMHO it amounts to the same thing. He complains about you using 'knows nothing about computerchess' as an argument (to guarantee that you are always right) often and against several different people. He says it's not very charming and doesn't sound very serious. The worst I can read into it is that you always want to convince everyone that you are always right in a discussion. Huh. I know that's true for me. I know it's true for Robert. I think it's right for many people who post here. And I also think it's right for you, but you're free to disagree with that of course. >>He didn't state it this way, but this is how I read it. It's > >PLANET EARTH TO PLANET JURASSICA, WHERE THE FUCK DO YOU LIVE? On a planet where one must have patience and understanding to get along with people? -- 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.