Author: Chessfun
Date: 08:58:34 09/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2002 at 11:06:55, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On September 10, 2002 at 10:30:33, Chessfun wrote: > >>Here are a couple of comments for you. >>Funny how Fritz 7 always seems to lose game one's huh, could it be that it's >>always unlucky in those first rounds? naturally only you would know why or how >>you have so many round 1's and Fritz seems to lose tham all....LOL > >do you speak english ? or is this the dialect of an ET aboriginy ? >sorry. i don't understand your english. > >fritz plays so many 1st rounds, because the autoplayer >often stops after 1 game. Oh, and you never played any games after the 1st Fritz 7 white Date "2002.09.03"]K6-400"] or after [Event "40/120, Athlon C-1200"] [Date "2002.09.03"]. Till the next Fritz 7 white?. Your games are a joke and always presented with incomplete data. >this gives fritz an advantage because >when you start another match, fritz has again WHITE. Er, not if you change who is master.......doh. >maybe you can write down your comments again in english that is understandable >for foreigners. I think most foreigners understood it perfectly well. >>My comment was neither direct to you or at you ;-), so how does that put your >>comment on what I choose to do on topic?, since it was a direct personal attack? > >i wonder why you comment about coffee in a thread i began with posting >chess data, IMO your comment had nothing to do with computerchess. >there was no chess nor computerchess related data in your comment other >than stalking. Er, excuse please. Were you not the one whom posted to my post?, I may have posted in a thread you started but not to you. >>No because you choose to comment on what and how I post. >>Since "I" exercise restraint and "UN" biased comment and simply post statistics >>rather than biased opinions, which apparently you can't seem to do. Even when >>you try, your anti CB rhetoric can't be prevented from showing. >i have no idea why you always defend chessbase, even when it is not attacked. >it seems to be your UNbiased comments are not that unbiased as you want >to suggest. >fritz leads the ssdf-list. >posting PGN data is not an attack against chessbase. so i wonder why you >need the feeling to defend them. maybe you are closely connected to them? >more than your unbiased comments would >suggest ? My unbiased comments are always about results. As you and many others are well aware I beta test for Rebel NOT for Chessbase. Posting a PGN naturally isn't an attack on Chessbase. I myself have posted many, including my latest rating list showing that from my data Chessbase no longer has the strongest program. However whenever you present data it's always incomplete leaving many to question your results, your methods, your bias. >shall i test against the weakeast program in the ssdf-list, only >that you can spare your coffee-statement stalking ? Test against anything you choose, it's your time to waste. >>I guess they must have hurt you really bad huh ;-) >as usual you do not come with ANY computerchess related comment. >it's completely unimportant whom you hurt or not. >this is a computerchess newsgroup. i do post pgn data and a few sentences >where chessbase is not mentioned nor any comment about fritz very weak >result, and instead talking about the computerchess related stuff >you come with strange comments about off topic stuff. Strange, but it was a goodie huh. And about as off topic as your attack on me. >you stalk ! thats obvious. >if you want to talk about your coffee - i would better choose a forum >that talks about coffee. CCC is IMO not about coffee. Someone stalks you simply by posting something you don't like, and always pointing out your tainted results and prejudices? hmmm strange world you live in. >i think the following books would help you as a good beginning, sarah: > >"I Know You Really Love Me": A Psychiatrist’s Journal of Erotomania, Stalking >and Obsessive Love by psychiatrist and stalking expert, Doreen Orion, MD. Almost >all of this web site’s information and all of its case histories are taken from >this book, which Gavin de Becker, America’s leading security expert called, >"remarkable" and the Rocky Mountain News called, "extraordinary." > >or the following: > >Cyber-Stalking: >Obsessional Pursuit and the Digital Criminal > >by Wayne Petherick Here are a couple of links that may help you with your fantasies. http://dmoz.org/Health/Mental_Health/ http://www.psychnet-uk.com/ http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminology/cyberstalking/3.htm That last one should also help....maybe in your case a lot. I quote; "False Victimisation Syndrome: This group accuses another person, either real or imaginary of stalking (Hickey, 1997) to foster sympathy and support from those around them. The majority of the perpetrators seem to be female (adapted from Zona and others; Mullen and Pathe, 1994; Mullen, 1997)." Something you've maybe been hiding? Sarah.
This page took 0.02 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.