Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:04:59 09/25/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 25, 1998 at 19:26:59, Shaun Graham wrote: > >> >>As I have pointed out before, this is a *prime* example of why we need >>moderators, but also why they need to see posts *before* they show up here. >>The post that "shaun/sean/etc" is talking about was his nonsense about >>"republicans". First, he had it backward (democrats want big government >>and big taxes, republicans want small government and low taxes). Second, >>it didn't belong here *at all*. Third, about 1/2 of his posts are trolls >>directed at me. He will occasionally get a "bite" when he continues the >>trolling. For an example, see his arcane "hmmm... looks like a GM performance >>to me" with nothing else written. >> >>We need a better system. This entire "thread" ought not exist. > > >This is just another attempt by you Bob to try to skirt around the issue, First >bye typing "Shaun/Sean/etc. Attempting to tie me in with the Sean Evans person >who was banned from here and who has NO relationship to me whatsoever. funny... he copied your post to r.g.c.c within a couple of minutes of it appearing here... seems suspicious to me... but irrelevant. Secondly >i don't have anything backwards " I totally agree these weak central gorvernment >wanting idealogues(republicans) >are getting on my last nerve too!!" Is a statement describing republicans as >people who want weak central government" Further this post was a response to >someone else's post. And if you want to say that you shouldn't respond too such >posts then you need to question why you have 2 responses in the thread >increasing it's length! Further there are no posts gere by me that have ANYTHING >to do with you or even crafty, and further you aren't supposed to be reading my >posts anyway considering that you have agreed to stay out of my posts. As for >my posts hmmm... looks like a GM performance to me" it is obviously and in no >way can be seen as any attack on you and has nothing to do with you unless you >think that you are the only person on this group who thinks computers aren't GM. > The posts were just mention of two events further supporting this idea, and the >mentioning of GM matches and offering the question about the comparison of >computer strength is something that concerns this group. > Beyond this You have AGREED to stay out of my posts, and I have agreed to stay >out of yours, the record is CLEAR i have not mentioned you in any posts, and >have not replied to any posts of yours. I have kept my word. This is something >that you have not done, explain that! Easy. Check out your "trolls" I pointed out. No content. No information. No nothing except a direct "troll" for the long thread we had before about whether Fritz was a GM or not... buzz off..
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.