Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 15:21:25 04/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 01, 2003 at 16:49:31, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 01, 2003 at 16:14:20, Peter Fendrich wrote: > >>On April 01, 2003 at 14:39:09, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>On April 01, 2003 at 14:08:13, Chessfun wrote: >>> >>>>It is sad that there are some that take any suffering of others as an event to >>>>be celebrated, that aside however. I can't believe that this is the reason, "Why >>>>I am not going to the Graz WCCC". I can see it causing upset but to cause you to >>>>not go to this event could be what the sender's intent was. >>>> >>>>You say the sender who is associated with Graz as "presumably a host", without >>>>finding out for sure whether he has any ties to the event why state that's the >>>>reason not to go?. >>> >>>I don't know what to call him. He is involved with the event, but he is not the >>>organizer. The organizer is the ICGA. The ICGA says that he is connected with >>>the event, but they were vague about his precise involvement. >>> >>>>You also state "I have little or no complaint about how the ICGA has handled >>>>this.".....Then what was the purpose of contacting them?. >>> >>>I wanted to find out if this person was an ICCA officer or programmer >>>representative. He is neither. >>> >>>My quarrel is not with the ICGA, but I am not going to go, because one of the >>>people working on putting the event together felt compelled to send me this >>>stuff, and presumably will be present at the event. >>> >>>bruce >> >> >>If ICGA have any kind of help from this person and he admits or there is proof >>that he send these emails, ICGA should immediately cut of that person from this >>and all future ICGA events. >>If they don't do that, nobody should go at all, American or not. >> >>/Peter > >Now that's a very one sided view on the world Peter Fendrich. > >Let's be clear on how ICGA events work. For example suppose i like to have an >event in Utrecht or Maastricht. Both are 'hometowns'. Then i go to a dude at >university i know and ask him: "can we keep a big event here?" > >Then after 2 years of talks, they might say 'yes perhaps'. Then you ship Levy >another email: "this organisation is interested". > >Then Levy ships them what they need (money, location, facilities like internet >is very important). > >Then i would need to organize a lot. But in fact that university organizes it. >And also the ICGA is involved. > >In short i need to do incredible effort to get everyone at one line, but i would >not be the organizer officially. The official organizer is the university and >the ICGA is the organisation that is practically in charge about who wins what >title and what rules get used and such and deliver tournament director(s). > >But the university has to deliver a lot. Money, facility, internet, people to do >stuff and so on. > >So how can you call me in such a case 'organizer' ? > >On paper that's either the university or the icga! > >The other aspect where many guess wrong here is the huge communication that >usually is there between chessprogrammers. Daily i get and ship loads of emails >from and to chessprogram authors. > >CCC and RGCC is not the place where the interesting things get shared. That >really is by email or by chat and nothing will soon get published ever online. > >So that sometimes also political emails get shipped, i can follow those logics. > >I'm guilty in that respect myself too. I shipped several my political concerns >about high voltage power lines (150KV+ transporting 2000A) and living under >them. > >In europe a lot of thoughts get written down and concerns and opinions about the >war in Iraq. Of course, not having too active contributions to the war and so >far no soldiers of your own country killed, it is much easier to discuss about >it, than when you are a nation with hundreds of thousands of men servicing >there. > >It is there where i guess the mistake has been made. > >It is a very stupid mistake, but even despite being myself a supporter of the >anti-terrorism war, i clearly understand how both sides react as they react now. > >Yet the ICGA is not part of this. > >I hope you realize that the majority of members in the ICGA board is from UK and >from the Netherlands. Both are supporters of the war. So blaming the ICGA in >this case is not a very good idea. Listen Vincent, If it's political or not, I don't care. If he sent it to Rumsfeld or someone responsible, I couldn't care less. It was a personal threat against one of his competitors. He sent it to Bruce. What the hell has Bruce with this war to do? Those are the methods that I associate with Don King and his friends and not amongst civilised people and I don't want ICGA to accept or be connected to that behaviour. I still pay money to them. It was not just a threat against Bruce. I regard it as a threat against everything I believe in when it comes to democratic principles. If both these guys had insulted or threatened each other before, well I would probably change my position about this. I don't know Bruce but he has always been one of the most sensible persons in this forum so I suppose it's not so. Finally I don't share Bruce's opinion about the war and we are many who don't share each others view on it and that has nothing to do with my feelings about this issue. /Peter
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.