Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 06:21:02 09/12/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 1998 at 04:41:10, Dirk Frickenschmidt wrote: >>>Why do you enjoy a difficult situation? >and Thorsaten answered: >>I do not see any difficulties in this situation. It is a pleasure for me. >>So i enjoy it. >Again: what is so enjoyable about it. When the Fritz autoplayer was missing, you >found that terrible and made all kinds of strange remarks about that. No. Wrong. I was not complaining about the missing fritz autoplayer... i was complaining about chessBase getting special treatment in sweden and the ssdf using the hidden autoplayer meanwhile chessbase can buy rebel and tune against rebel. Ed is now, as a result of this unfair/unbalanced situation, not anymore supporting chessbase tuning against rebel. So - I was complaining about matthias negotiations with the ssdf-guys to use a NON-PUBLIC autoplayer. You still don't get the point, really ! You don't get the difference, he ? It's something complete different. Not ED is unfair, chessBase=fritz got an unfair special condition. Differenciation is not your master job, isn't it ? >But now: no difficulties at all? >Did you get used to manual playing and meanwhile find joy in it again? :-) Yes - when i play manually games (not with the hidden/secret autoplayer), fritz plays weak and loses (like in paris). I like and I enjoy this much. :-)) >He said he wants the SSDF not to accept secret autoplayers and expressed clearly >that this would be no measure aiming at Chessbase. Right. I see it different. Ed has to speak in another language. I don't have to be diplomatic. And i will not be diplomatic. Nobody can stop me from saying my opinion. >Ed also never said that Moritz or Enrique's Fritz autoplayer games were reasons >for his decisions. I just read his correction of your false claim. I can claim whatever i want dirk. This is a free world. I hope you can do the same. But i am not sure. You are a priest :-) >So why do you play your private games like or dislike with these things? >All this ranting just to keep your favourite enemy picture alive? There is no ranting. I need no enemies when i have friends like you dirk. :-) >Their rules and tesing methods have always been controversial. I think I know this, thanks dirk :-) >What is over when and why, concerning SSDF, is hardly decided by any of us. I have an opinion about this. My opinion is different from yours. Do you have a problem with this ? >So just wait and see. I don't wait. My opinion has made. In all the years before. >And perhaps show some more critical empathy. Thanks dirk. I will try to do so. >I had written >>>You can't quit thinking in categories of "enemy forces", scinece fiction >>>metaphors of cyborg threats (as you used to do) and the like, can't you? > >and you answered: >>ChessBorg, right. >>I like sf. it has a moral. It has a message. Ethics. > >Yes, it is oversimplisizing good and bad for us kids :-)) >To give us the feeling we are on the right side against the dark forces. >I like it as much as you, but I would never forget the limits of this phantasy >world and its interpretation of good and bad. > >>Without killing any barbarians. Just by the topic. >>chessbase=capitalism for me. >>And i am not the only person thinking this. > >These simple fundamentalistic metaphors only work in rare cases, where you >either meet pure evil or something extremely good. > >To put Chessbase in such categories is a bit ridiculous. >It's just a not too big company with people working there. >They do somethings well and some things less well. >That's all. > >I said >>>You can't imagine that there is no need at all to define oneself in such >>>children cowboy and red indian catgories, can you? >You answered: >>Pah - indians are not negative in my world. Maybe in yours. In my world the >>cowboys are the negative ones. As chessBase is. Capitalists. > >This is really funny: you thought I prefer cowboys over indians? >Not at all. I played both as a child, most times indians. > >I just wanted to say that for adult people it is not always appropriate to think >in these simple enemy patterns: creating enemies by definition so to say... > >I wrote >>>But we are not at war here, not even at any silly ideological war about >>>companies or program concepts or programmers. >And you answered: >>No - there is no war on the world. No conflicts and no problems. >>Only a few. Presidents fucking young girls in the white house. Crazy right wing >>politicians leading israel. russia losing complete control. Some bombs in >>northern-ireland. Some dead people in indonesia. Some conflicts here and there. >>Nothing to worry about. haha ! >> >Once more: what are you reading into what I wrote? >I wrote: we are not at any kinds of ideological war about programmesrs or >companies here. > >You answered with citing and interpreting all kinds of political conflicts all >over the world. Can't you see any difference between computerchess and serious >matters heavily concerning and hurting people? Is it all one big >fundamentalistic picture of black and white, wrong and right, allies and >enemies? > >I wrote >>>We're just having fun in chess. At least most of us... >> >>I am having much fun. For example that ed has decided this way. >>YOU are the one who has no humor ! >>I am laughing. Loud. > >In Germany we say "Schadenfreude ist auch 'ne Freude", meaning that laughing >about problems or damage (in your case the wrongly assumed "showing chessbase >the red card") may be a kind of joy, but centainly not the best... > >If you say I have no humor you may be right in a way: >I hope my humor is of another kind... > >>>--rest snipped-- >>> > >Regards >from Dirk
This page took 0.01 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.