Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 16:02:39 09/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 2002 at 18:51:10, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > You seem to have a problem with my claim of scientist. of course. we all misunderstand you. >There is >no business, no past business, nothing. :-))) how big is your nose when you write such a thing down ? still growing ? > I'm not the stalker Thorsten is. couldn't it be that you post about rebel macheide style and the games i posted and with all kind of crude stories that have nothing to do with computerchess and that YOU is stalking here ROLF ? >Just read Chessfun for that detail. :-))) yes - good reference for this topic :-))) >Thorsten has problems with many. Me included. of course. we build this forum to get rid of you. and you know why. because you asked your question years and years before in RGCC. and in the end you called us all ... you remember it. now you are back. how nice for us. its your comeback ! what do you contribute now ? > Already in July I contacted Thorsten with >post nr. 5. He reacted in a strange manner. the strange manner was that i said that the fact that you don't know what has happened showed how much you have to learn. >It's already a mistake for having answered you. Because you have no point. No >argument. If I ask you above how you could address me although Thorsten did >present bad data [I gave you 5 examples, games], what is BAD data ? the fact that shredder plays wrong openings. what shall i do ? play games that fit into your concept and delete the others ?? very scientific rolf. it makes no sense rolf. its IMO sysiphus . its a never ending story. you will endlessly repeat your sentences. and it will fill pages. "what they have done to you." Amen
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.