Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 03:00:20 04/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 03, 2003 at 23:27:15, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On April 03, 2003 at 21:44:35, Keith Evans wrote: > >>Bruce basically received a veiled death threat. (English isn't your native >>language, so you may not have realized this.) As a result he's not going to >>travel to Graz. Explain how this helped the Iraqi citizens. > >I could have whined about it being a death threat, but it's pretty clear that >it's not. This would have been a pretty obtuse interpretation. > >Definitely an anti-American sentiment though, and not an abstract one since it >was sent directly to me. > >Arguing with Rolf is not productive in this case, I believe. What you believe is not always right. Here my exchange with Keith led to the correction by you that this was a "veiled" death threat against you and that therefore you wouldn't go to Graz. Pathetic. But useful conversation. But go you now for the character assassination. Bruce, if you don't change your analysis of these private emails as fast as you can, the whole scandal (your publication) will cost you your future in CC. You are badly wrong, Bruce. Since I like you I plea you to reconsider. NOTE: I am not involved. I am not talking for my advantages. I know 100% that you are badly mistaken and if the aftermath now will hurt Chrilly because you decided to make such a public event out of it, it will be your problem, not Chrilly's. Just a trivial try to persuade you and those who support more your position. YOU got private email. YOU are personally concerned. YOU are shocked. YOU consult officials. YOU decided to go into the public of CCC and published the content of this private email, at least its part that I called ART. Just this structure of events, ok? Can't you see that this is scandalous? Independent of your decision you added - not to go to Graz, which then became the main prob. But the main prob here is your indecence by publishing a problem from private email into public. The whole confusion you created here is good to be seen in the latest post by "Keith". "Death threat" against you. But "veiled". You made a first step and said no to such nonsense. Bruce, you will have to say no inclusive apologize for bringing the whole topic against Chrilly into public. I doubt that you will do it, but then you will lose your class and standing, no matter what later could be repaired. Trust for one time my judgement. I swear that Chrilly was the emotionally deeper involved due to this war than you. Exactly that creates such intellectual cynism. You are simply unable to understand this intellectually? I read all what you wrote in CTF and you slightly changed your position over the period of time. But he contacted you as an American via PRIVATE EMAIL and you still didn't understand what this was all about. Somewhere you gave two or three alternatives what you could have done, but at that moment you already had destroyed the whole ethics. You had published the data. But Chrilly did NEVER publish these postcards (photo plus text)! You are now in a mess. Please try to solve it. Why not asking Chrilly for help? Why not telling him why you are so concerned and confused? Besides the point if you go or go not. This should be solved among friends. CC friends. GENS *UNA* SUMUS I wish you that you might be able to find the almost impossible way out, Rolf P.S.With "art" I always mean political art. It'san accepted form of artistic propaganda. The routes are at least back in the 1930s. But today's technique brought new standards. The key idea is always in the tension between the photo and the added text. But you can surely research all that in your local library. > >bruce
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.