Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 08:10:07 04/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 04, 2003 at 08:54:39, alan palmer wrote: >On April 04, 2003 at 05:21:40, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On April 03, 2003 at 21:22:46, alan palmer wrote: >> >>>On April 03, 2003 at 06:07:04, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On April 02, 2003 at 10:00:10, alan palmer wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 02, 2003 at 06:38:08, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 01, 2003 at 19:59:26, alan palmer wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Its one thing to discuss the issues involved but sending these type of emails to >>>>>>>individuals makes it personal and thats out of order. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Objection! Ok, I don't know you and have no idea of your involvement into CC but >>>>>>the key for a better understanding of these PERSONAL emails, are ____ now your >>>>>>turn ... have you no idea? The key for these personal cynical postcards is the >>>>>>PERSONAL connection estimated by the sender with the addressees. Ok, but the two >>>>>>mentioned addrressees already refused to show any kind of personal concern. BOTH >>>>>>have reacted as if they were sitting on Dubya's lap or Laura's? :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Folks IF WE here in the community lose the rest of our humour, call it cynism, >>>>>>that is so important for any kind of intellectual living, then we've lost the >>>>>>battle of our lives. We ain't no such fools, no? >>>>>> >>>>>>It's astonishing that you saw the main key but you waved your arms as if you had >>>>>>discovered the abyss of Evil. But the key is designed to be our only hope! >>>>>>I can only advise to go into personal talks between all of you, Europeans and >>>>>>Americans alike. >>>>>> >>>>>>Rolf Tueschen >>>>> >>>>>Are you for real? Of course its personal: why send them to the individuals >>>>>concerned otherwise. Emails to individuals are by their very nature, PERSONAL. >>>> >>>>As I said, you see it but still you support open publication. Who is real here? >>>> >>>> >>>>>As for whether Bruce took the emails personally I suggest you read his comments >>>>>again. If it was a general comment >>>> >>>>I knew that it could make no sense talking to you. You simply can't understand. >>>>It WAS personal because the two know each other. Enough said? >>>> >>>> >>>>>about the war why not just post on the >>>>>relevant site and leave it at that. As for my involvement with this site (why >>>>>should that be mentioned), i was not aware i needed to post my C.V. before I >>>>>made a comment - I will comment where i think fit. >>>>> >>>>>Your comments re addresses etc is pontificating crap. >>> >>>I am quite aware they know each other but according to you Bruce did not take >>>the email personally - my point was I think he did. If you read his mail >>>carefully you might have noticed it. Are you saying you wouldn't have!! You must >>>be very thicked skinned. >> >> >>The other day I had someone who didn't know the term turkey. Now I have you >>confusing the term personally. >> >>1) Like you I always saw that Bruce had taken this private email *personally*. >> >>BUT >> >>2) My objection is NOT aginst his personal reaction but the following: that >>Bruce didn't keep personal a personal and private email but went into public >>here and published it more or less. That is the scandal. >> >> >>Please try to read and think a bit more carefully. Thanks. >> >> >> >> >>> >>>As for open publication, I did not say I was against that: I'm against making >>>these issues personal. It solves nothing and can make the situation worse but >>>you waffle on so much you lose the thread of your own argument! So, from now on, >>>why don't you: 1) put away your professorial hat and 2) stop thinking you are >>>always right. You know it makes sense. >>> >>>Oh and don't take this this message personally! > > >I suggest you read your comments again and be more clear in the future. > >As for Bruce going public with this matter, I agree with him: By ignoring what >they say It would make life easy for those that who send these type of emails >but by going public it shows them up for what they are, nasty. > >We clearly cannot agree on this matter, so we should agree to disagree. Bye. The fact that you can't read properly cannot bring me to a different style. I know that intelligent people usually understand me. But you have an agenda. You agree with Bruce although he violated the ethics of usenet/internet. The email wasn't spam. The email was persona=private email from a friend/programmer. But Bruce had not enough class to react properly. Thats it.
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.