Author: Ed Panek
Date: 14:03:00 11/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 13, 2002 at 16:00:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On November 13, 2002 at 14:38:36, Ed Panek wrote: > >>On November 13, 2002 at 14:11:53, Marc van Hal wrote: >> >>>On November 13, 2002 at 13:39:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On November 13, 2002 at 11:37:50, Marc van Hal wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 13, 2002 at 11:27:49, Marc van Hal wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 13, 2002 at 11:17:39, Peter Berger wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Are you talking about this one? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?264591 >>>>>> >>>>>>yes >>>>>>Why is it not on it's original place? >>>>>>Like you see you get misunderstandings in this way >>>>>>Marc >>>>> >>>>>I forgot to mention the harasment it can give for both both party's >>>>>For the poster who later on finds the posting after he behaved himself like a >>>>>fool . >>>>>And the moderation where is getting trowed at without good reasons. >>>>>(Only trying to hide my mistake he he but in fact it's treu.) >>>>>Ok an other apolegy for the moderation anyways. >>>>>Marc >>>> >>>> >>>>Notice there was no "moderation" involved here. >>>> >>>>It is a simple "user error". Your messages are still there... You just need to >>>>extend >>>>the filter interval to see them again. >>> >>>Was there something wrong with my apology? >>>Again this is typicaly a programmer eror >>>Thinking if I know it everyone knows it. >>>Gues what your almost always wrong when you think like this >>>There is no manual so it is definitly not a user mistake. >>>(Talking about crystal balls and Marjuhana he he) >>>In fact you once told me you made the same kind of erors yourself! >>>But I still didn't knew about the time filters. >>>I do know it now so if I repeat this eror then it's a user mistake! >>> >>>Regards >>>Marc >> >> >>Marc, >> >> I rmember one of my College Profs told me: the way to discern if a statement >>is hostile is to remove it from the text and examine by itself in 2 ways >> >>1) Does the statement (with the offending phrase removed) still make sense? >>2) Does the removed statement alone offend? >> >>The answer to this is yes and yes. Certian authors add unnecessary language to >>insult people. >> >>Ed > > >I didn't see anything insulting anywhere. Just an implied criticism about posts >being >removed by moderators for no reason. Was there something I missed??? IMHO the above statement could have been interpreted as insulting. Why use the descriptor "simple" then " user error" ? It has a tortured point, sounds condescending and to me it infers something easily avoided. You chose to blame the users inability to understand the software as the reason it didnt work...which is perfectly legit...except that every piece of software ever written has been to serve a person(aka human being) eventually so this position is short sighted. IMO the problem lies somewhere between the 2 ( user and software) If you have never realized you accidentally insulted someone without your knowledge you havent spent much time with women :-)Ever tell the wife she looks "nice" NICE!!?! Oh yes. Sorry dear, you look magnificent! Ed
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.