Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 09:21:34 11/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 2002 at 12:55:00, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On November 11, 2002 at 12:46:30, Gerd Isenberg wrote: > >You probably didn't read the last 30 postings of that person here >where he insults me a lot. I just drop 1 line and he >starts another war. > >So i may not drop 1 line, but he may? > >I do not see the logics. > >then i comment with hard facts on promises and statements done regarding >the subject without saying that i want to kill that person nor saying that >i want to kick him back to europe where he belongs. > >online even more cruel words were used by the person in question. > >Do you see the logics of that? > >Cursing against me is legal, just dropping 1 line against the person in >question is not? > >I did *not* start the escalation cycle. Just read all the postings of >the person in question. > >First he attacks my program, when i do not react he starts attacking me. > >We have a statement here: "a lunatic can cause more harm than 100 wise men >can fix". That's what happens here IMHO. > >Wiseley as i am (or not) i did not react onto all these postings. > >Where do i see the protests against *these* postings? > >If you treat people, treat them fair. > >I didn't say i want to kill someone. I didn't post i want to kick someone >back to europe. I didn't lie about facts. > >Here things get measured in 2 ways it seems to me. > >Is that fair? > >>Vincent, >>i have great respect for you and your knowledge, and i would prefere to further >>read your computer chess related statements here. >> >>You started the escalation cycle and now you are harmed: >> >>>Tournaments in Edmonton organized by Peter Skinner i can't take >>>serious though. >> >>Which obviously hurts Peter Skinner, even if his reply was too crude IMHO. >>But that's the way escalation gets it own dymanic. >>We all are more or less conceitedness and vulnerable. >> >>Bob statements: >> >>"I'm interested in who starts what" >>"I don't care what you are referring to" >> >>implies indeed some contradiction, but is it worth to point that out? >> >>Cheers, >>Gerd In fact I don't know much about the postings you made. But i agree calling someone a fucking idiot because you totaly disagree with the things he says is different from threaten someone As long if you think you have to take them serious.(Tough some smilelys or he he's could show your feeling when writting it.) I also can tell if someone on this forum would start kicking Or buy a machine gun and blow the house down it would be me he he. And this is not ment against you!
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.