Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Dangers in CC - SSDF: Terminology, Statistics

Author: Tony Hedlund

Date: 09:12:05 02/23/03

Go up one level in this thread


On February 22, 2003 at 06:42:46, Rolf Tueschen wrote:

>On February 22, 2003 at 05:52:09, Tony Hedlund wrote:
>
>>On February 21, 2003 at 15:47:11, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>
>>>Tony,
>>>
>>>I want to say to you the same as to Jonas. To me it makes no sense to talk to
>>>you because you don't like open debates. Your interest is to defed SSDF also in
>>>its faults. But that then develops into a mean debate with tricks an personal
>>>attacks.
>>
>>Not by me.
>>
>>>It simply makes no sense. I am interested in the best theoretical views
>>>while you want to justify SSDF by all means. This becomes boring. Because you
>>>defend false methods. But I don't care. Do what you want. I debate with people
>>>of similar scientifical interest.
>>
>>Then why don't you answer Maurizio De Leo's questions, and debate with him?
>>Or is it so that "people of similar scientifical interest" is people with the
>>same idea as you, as Richard Pijl seem to have. Whom you willingly debate with.
>
>That is a good example for what I called personal attacks. You don't know what
>you are talking here. Scientifical interests is identical with objective
>questioning and analysing. Period.

I see you have stopped debating with Richard Pijl. Is he not objective anymore?
:)

Tony

>Rolf Tueschen
>
>
>
>>
>>Tony
>>
>>>If you should have questions or something new
>>>then I will return. But this here is simply too time consuming.
>>>
>>>Don't take this as a personal attack.
>>>
>>>Rolf Tueschen



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.