Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 10:52:32 02/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 27, 2003 at 12:11:47, Harald Faber wrote: >If you find any irony in this text, you are an attentive reader! > > >On February 27, 2003 at 07:05:27, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>This itself is a very good example for trolls. Harold, also a former moderator, >>and from Germany, [where most of those came from who followed undemocratic >>traditions during the change from rgcc to ccc; I can well give the names if >>someone wants it], is a symbol for those who > >Cool, I am a symbol! >(BTW aren't you from Germany too?) > >> - present their "test results" from autoplayer games > >I admit this is a crime. > >> - have no time to discuss the sense of the naked data > >I have no time for nothing. You could have more time if you knew how to concentrate on the essential. You often concentrate on uninteresting details. E.g. the chess content of autoplayed games... > >> - are unable to understand the meaning of a general and basic critic > >Probably I understand nothing too. You are a symbol for the points I've given. Yes, you often judge without having understood what you are judging. > >> - therefore take such critics as a personal attack against their hobby > >Oops, are you really wrong? No, I don't take it personal How could you, since I did never address you during our stay in rgcc, nevertheless you wrote against me in rgcc, CCS, CCC, just name it. That is typical for certain German CC autoplayer testers, who misunderstand their hobby as an exclusive area they occupied - in their fantasy. >I just find it >annoying and nerving to read the same stories again and again. Based on nothing. Hehe. You need some more repetitions. >And if you are as scientifical as you pretend to be, then you should know that >first there has to be DATA on which discussions etc. should be based on. And I >don't speak of available SSDF data. We have a little misunderstanding. To get DATA in CC and to publish it is the simplest thing to do. But to know WHAT data make sense that is not so easy. So I do a very exclusive job... Perhaps now you understand why you only see repetitions. For me each case is of individual wealth. > >> - then instead of training in tolerance go into biting mode of extinction > >Training in tolerance... this really makes me laugh. I knew that because with democratic principles you would have opposed undemocratic tendencies. But since I did NOT _your_ button hobby, in reality I did the real job: I played thousands of games against the progs that you only tested, you believed that I were nothing worth. >My patience in fact is >adored by some friends, but how should you know... Patience is a noble character trait but tolerance is a much more valuable conviction. Patience is no ethical value, but tolerance is one of the basic values of democracy. > >> - misunderstand the meaning of challenge & refutations > >How do you know what I understand and what I don't? I know your messages of the last 6 years. I special your famous 1-word-messages. > >> - can only imagine such refutations on the same level they do tests > >Uh, another crime. > >> - can't get that sometimes tests are pretty meaningless > >LOL! I'm not a clair-voyant so I can't know what makes you laugh. > >> - misinterprete their own activity as the only imaginable one > >Yes, I misinterprete, cannot imagine anything, I am really a poor guy. In fact you are a very special tester with comparably high interest in the chess itself. Something very rare in the scene today. > >> - misuse the charta which forbids personal attacks (troll, pissed [!]) > >No need to whine now. That is no whiing, that is about your lack of democratic convictions. > >> - misuse their "expert" status for exerting power in a social group > >Indeed, I really remember pushing CCC-members to make them complain about you, >insult you, demand your withdrawel etc. And 90% of all those who have read my >propaganda did as I wished. I am really a powerful guy now. No, you're never the pusher, you are the one who always joins the already existing movement. > >>I could give more such items. The most illogical argument is in fact that the >>activities of the average "tester" could only be challenged with "alternative" >>data [apparently imaginable only as the same sort of testings only with >>_different_ results] and not with a totally different approach. So it's always >>the same. Thoughts are more important than material, in special if material is >>based on mistaken thoughts. >> >>Rolf Tueschen > > >In all these years nothing has changed. You are still questioning everything but >do not present other ways based on experimental data that could show that your >approach is right. Excuse me. If you could understand what I am aiming for you could avoid certain mistakes and that would be a great success for me. And yes, our whole life is questioning and problem-solving. >This is kind of German opposition. Always complaining but not >able to do it better himself. You seem very confused. Opposition against undemocratic tendencies is ok. I do not complain. I simply express what is a scientifical nonsense. You can well continue your autoplayer tests. Nothing wrong with that. You simply shouldn't read me. >Or "Besserwisser sind Schlechtermacher". >Criticizing other people's work is easy. Wrong. If it were others before would have written what I did. In fact it is very difficult to understand what is going on in a field. NB in a practice where everyone does the right things... >Doing better obviously does not count >to your qualifications. Doing better autoplayer games? Another couple of hundreds of games. As I told you I play myself against computer progs. >You just hide all your misbehaviour behind your excellent English vocabulary. Excellent vocabulary? You are kidding. You suffer from projection here. Why should I HIDE what I had to say? If that were the case I were everybody's darling. 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.