Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:59:57 07/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 28, 2002 at 10:00:27, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On July 27, 2002 at 23:14:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 27, 2002 at 19:38:20, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>On July 26, 2002 at 23:14:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On July 26, 2002 at 15:08:26, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>> >>>>>Detlev Pordzik again. After the first complaint the moderators did not even >>>>>answer me. So this is the consequence. Pordzik thinks that he had the right to >>>>>violate the charta of CCC which says that personal attacks are forbidden. >>>>> >>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>> >>>> >>>>There have been _zero_ complaints. At least _I_ have received no complaints. >>>>I assume the other two moderators have not either since we _all_ get the >>>>complaints sent to us individually. >>> >>>Bob, >>> >>>if you insist, I can well publish the two texts CCC sent me in reaction to the >>>emails I sent to you (the moderators). Because when you send such a message >>>there is automatic message with text and the details of the time and so on. >>> >>>I quoted the numbers of the particular messages from "Pordzik" and simply >>>pointed out why his messages were abusive in the light of the charta of CCC. >>> >>>Take e.g. the second complaint. There he states in his message that he couldn't >>>find any ranking place for me whatsoever. He then concludes that therefore my >>>contributions here are (I sum up his view) worthless. This is only a very short >>>summary. But - since I do not teach chess theory here, there is absolutely no >>>sense in such a message. The only reason for such a message is the personal >>>attack and so the abuse of the charta here that forbids personal attacks. >> >>Fell free to post them or email them to me. I did not receive them unless >>I was sedated without my knowledge... > >The evidence is right below here in the posting, actually it was already there >_before_ you wrote the little joke above. A joke because - as you described - >all three moderators get copies of such emails. Since I got the affirmation back >from your server it's clear that you should have them too - at least unless you >were sedated, of course without your knowledge... But in my case three >moderators should have been sedated without their knowledge, and this two times >in the last couple of days. Looks spooky somehow. I'm very worried about you >because if it's epidemic, then it's already world-wide since Christophe is miles >away from the USA. Of course there could be a different solution. I have not received _any_ moderator email complaints in the past couple of weeks? Any other moderator getting these from Rolf? I am getting daily moderator email from ICC about new folks signing up, but the only things I remember recently were a few users asking us to remove things they had posted themselves, or a couple of other complaints that are not Rolf-related... Any moderator recall anything different? > >We still have the minor important question if in CCC it should be allowed to >commit character assassination by calling a member (and then if the member is >me) "steered underground assasinate". I agree that for the moment the question >of the where abouts of the emails must have absolute priority for you. Until >then you can't have any informations concerning the content of the two emails - >unfortunately. > >Rolf Tueschen > I think it is a testament to the moderators past and present that you are allowed to post here, _period_ after your nonsense in r.g.c.c... I suggest that you simply stop your nonsense here and post reasonable stuff. If you start to demand moderation policy changes, it is very possible that _you_ will be the first recipient of those changes... > > >> >> >> >>> >>>Everybody might have personal opinions about anyone but the intensiously >>>directed personal attack is by definition insultive and forbidden here. >>> >>>I want to claim for me the right that also in my case the charta of CCC should >>>be respected. >>> >>>If the mentioned author would have brought forward any reasonable arguments why >>>I was wrong in a message I would surely have responded him. >>> >>>Let me shortly lead your attention on his first insultive message. There he >>>wrote expressis verbis the following that this chap or whatever, from the >>>_context_ it's absolutely clear that he meant me, that I were a (quote) "steered >>>underground assassinate" in some German newsgroups etc. pp. This is absolute >>>fantasy. Therefore and also because this has nothing to do with computerchess >>>and surely not this forum, it is abusive and character assassination. Because >>>the job of a mole or whatever is not directly what is estimated as honorable >>>profession. But since it is absolutely false in my case, it is character >>>assassination. And this here right in the middle of this forum, where personal >>>attacks already are forbidden. >>> >>>Beyond many differences which we two might have, I think, we do both believe in >>>th freedom of speech. But in the Pordzik case the mentioned author has _not_ >>>taken part in the debates here where I was involved. Then suddenly he writes >>>such insults. Alone from that angle it must be clear that he has a personal axe >>>to grind. But, the hype is, that he doesn't want to discuss his insults, but he >>>is proud to write against me that his sole intention is (suddenly! - because >>>earlier this year he invited me repeatedly to write in his own forum and he >>>telephoned with me in hour-long chats) to prevent that I could write my >>>opinions. Beyond all our differences I see no reason at all that you should be >>>interested in such intentions. Because, I might be "lame" in my thought process, >>>I might be a bad English writer, but you wouldn't assume that my opinions had no >>>content, when I based my opinions and more so questions on pure science and >>>logic, in the SSDF or DB2 threads. The mentioned author however has repeatedly >>>informed me that any form of critic is in his view unwanted and simply not >>>clever. And also negative for mutual relationships. Of course such a view is >>>reasonable in business. But here we do not have just business I think. Here we >>>can discuss on the base of science and logic. >>> >>>I learned a lot from POPPER and other scientists of science. Progress is always >>>a consequence of "conjectures" and "refutations". This has no personal nor >>>abusive content whatsoever. >>> >>>Of course friendship is of highest value. But the negative side is when >>>friendship is often misinterpreted as partizanship. I did never belong to a side >>>or certain interests. I'm independant. And therefore such character >>>assassinations are very evil. In truth I did never work for someone against >>>someone else. POPPER described what happens with 'closed' systems of thought. >>> >>>Will you deny me here the right of protection against such unfounded, ugly, >>>personal attacks in the Pordzik-style? "Steered underground assassinative"? >>> >>> >>>Rolf Tueschen >>> >>>Here are the texts I got from CCC for my complaints I sent to moderators, I made >>>unreadable certain parts because this was email: >>> >>>The following message has been sent to ccc@icdchess.com: >>>From: rtueschen@t-online.de (Rolf Tueschen) >>>Subject: CCC Moderator E-mail >>> >>>Reply-to: rtueschen@t-online.de (Rolf Tueschen) >>>[ name: ] Rolf Tueschen >>>[ email: ] rtueschen@t-online.de >>>[ body: ] >>>Hi, >>> >>>in the message 242 711 Detlev Pordzik again wrote completely off-topic only >>>about me. This is called ad hominem. I beg you to do something against such >>>personal attacks because they are forbidden after the charta of CCC. >>> >>>Thank you >>> >>>Rolf Tueschen >>>[ user: ] xxxxxx >>>--- >>>This message was sent to you by xxxxxxxxxxxx >>>on Fri Jul 26 19:04:42 2002 (GMT). >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>The following message has been sent to ccc@icdchess.com: >>>From: rtueschen@t-online.de (Rolf Tueschen) >>>Subject: CCC Moderator E-mail >>> >>>Reply-to: rtueschen@t-online.de (Rolf Tueschen) >>>[ name: ] Rolf Tueschen >>>[ email: ] rtueschen@t-online.de >>>[ body: ] >>> Hi! >>> >>>The posting 242364 from Detlev Pordzik contains clearly put insults and >>>character assassination. [xxxxxxx snipped two paragraphes for personal reasons >>>since this was email!] >>> >>>I hereby ask you to delete the posting nr. 242364 and tell Detlef to stop the >>>nonsense. >>> >>>If you should have any questions to me please contact me, I'm willing to solve >>>the conflict. I hope that you won't let here in CCC poeple insulted. >>> >>>Thanks to anyone here who reads this as moderator. >>> >>>Rolf Tueschen >>>[ user: ] xxxxx >>>--- >>>This message was sent to you by xxxxxxxx >>>on Wed Jul 24 18:35:21 2002 (GMT).
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.