Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 23:19:32 04/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 2003 at 03:08:54, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>On April 04, 2003 at 23:03:52, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On April 04, 2003 at 21:12:41, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>>
>>>On April 02, 2003 at 22:33:09, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>>>
>>>>On April 02, 2003 at 17:56:31, Amir Ban wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>I read it, but I don't understand why you are not going. Let's see, will you:
>>>>>
>>>>>- Be aiding evil acts ?
>>>>>- Do something unpatriotic ?
>>>>>- Identify with views you don't support ?
>>>>>- Appear to endorse the jerk ?
>>>>>
>>>>>None of this seems to apply. It's not like going to Berlin 1936 or even Moscow
>>>>>1980.
>>>>>
>>>>>The only issue that I understand is worrying that you'll be met with hostility.
>>>>>I think it's reasonable to ask the ICGA to ensure this doesn't happen. After all
>>>>>the President is British (and Jewish).
>>>>>
>>>>>Your agenda should be:
>>>>>
>>>>>1. Win the war
>>>>>2. Try to win Graz
>>>>
>>>>This is fair, but I don't feel that it is appropriate for me to go. I don't
>>>>want to accept hospitality from someone who would send something like that in
>>>>email.
>>>>
>>>>It is hard to bother an American with symbols. The swastika doesn't mean that
>>>>much to us, for instance, we don't have a visceral reaction to it. A burning
>>>>American flag means something to some people, but it means very little to a lot
>>>>of people, for instance me.
>>>>
>>>>Soldiers are something different. We had Vietnam, and everyone here knows how
>>>>much the returning soldiers were hurt by people who spit at them and so on. So
>>>>now, no matter what people believe about any particular war, everyone here has
>>>>figured out that the troops are off limits. If you criticize, you go top down,
>>>>not the other way.
>>>>
>>>>I can't think of anything you could send an American that would offend them
>>>>more. Really. If any American has an idea, please let me know.
>>>>
>>>>It goes beyond this though. There is genuine animosity underlying this. I
>>>>don't want to accept the hospitality of someone who hates Americans and feels
>>>>compelled to express it this way. How do you accept hospitality from someone
>>>>who makes it clear to you that he hates you? This is not just a vaguely
>>>>unpleasant post, or something like that. This was an email so off the wall that
>>>>I thought it might be a forged-header "Here is a special program, you are the
>>>>first to see it, I hope you are liking it very much" virus thing.
>>>>
>>>>Perhaps the sender meant it as an anti-war email. But I took it as a hate post,
>>>>and I think most Americans would also take it this way.
>>>>
>>>>Beyond all of this is something very concrete that affects someone other than
>>>>myself. I have received an email that essentially expresses the hope that a
>>>>specific basically innocent person will undergo torture and death, which seems
>>>>rather likely at this point. How can I receive this and have anything to do
>>>>with the person who sent it?
>>>>
>>>>Finally, let's talk about the person who sent the email. He sent more of these,
>>>>with little stir. Maybe an angry email back. If I had ignored this, if I had
>>>>argued with him about the war, if I had called him an asshole, or in some other
>>>>way had reacted as *he* planned, he would feel like he had done the right thing.
>>>> He would feel good about having done this. If I do this instead, perhaps at
>>>>some point he will regret that he sent this material. He may feel bad about
>>>>having done this. That's a step in the right direction.
>>>>
>>>>Let him learn that there are consequences when you do this kind of thing.
>>>>
>>>>bruce
>>>
>>>
>>>While the first email sent to you alone is bad enough, sending you a second,
>>>even more objectionable email after you expressed your displeasure with
>>>receiving the first shows very poor judgement on the part of the sender.
>>>
>>>You could consider doing the following things:
>>
>>without saying i agree or disagree. let's look objective from lawyer viewpoints:
>>
>>a) typical dumb american reaction let me go into details
>>
>>>1. Check if in your jurisdiction, there is something that limits freedom of
>>>expression ("speech" in the USA) where the primary purpose of such expression is
>>>to espouse hatred.
>>
>>lawyer costs in USA, but in the end they will tell you they do not know because
>>to sue such persons you need to sue someone in his own hometown.
>>
>>>2. If so, file a formal complaint with your local police.
>>
>>austrian police will laugh at you for something like that and judge you as the
>>typical american, confirming their ideas about them.
>>
>>>3. Check if in the sender's jurisdiction, there is something similar.
>>
>>yeah you can start a courtcase in the town where the person lives.
>>his village is like 200 people so you probably need to go to the nearest
>>'canton'.
>>
>>Then the next question is what court you try to sue someone.
>>
>>That means in the meantime you already pay triple lawyer costs, because
>>in europe (and i assume in austria it isn't much diff from netherlands here):
>> a) under european law in general courtcases without paying lawyers is
>>forbidden
>> b) you need a laywer to start a courtcase
>>
>>Then after $5000 lawyer costs you will find out that actually in europe winning
>>a courtcase is very difficult. Basically you can win a courtcase if the sued
>>person doesn't defend himself. Amazingly enough many do not do that indeed. They
>>do not show up.
>>
>>But this person would show up with a lawyer.
>>
>>>4. If so, file a formal complaint with his local police.
>>
>>You repeat yourself here. That's already adresses above. They will laugh in
>>austria for that.
>>
>>>5. File a formal complaint with the sender's employer. (Even in a university,
>>>there are practical limits to an academic's freedom of expression.)
>>
>>Chessbase will say they have nothing to do with this and they better do so as
>>they got some economical interests:
>>
>>Imagine Brutus wins its own tournament and then plays kasparov. Then chessbase,
>>good in marketing, will sell perhaps 50000 cards of brutus.
>>
>>50k cards x 500 euro = 25 million euro = about 25 million dollar
>>
>>Of course that is not the profit. Profit is a small part of it.
>>Perhaps only 45% of it.
>>
>>The reason why it is so important to let brutus win the world champs is because
>>possible profit from it winning is much more than Fritz in this case as each
>>unit sells for more than average.
>>
>>Not the world title will be so much taking care of the sales, but the resulting
>>match against kasparov would.
>>
>>>6. I hope you are able to at least receive a formal apology with a commitment
>>>that such an act will not be performed by the sender again. Of course, you
>>>could try to press for considerably more than that, depending on how badly
>>>you've been offended.
>>
>>I bet in germany they are cheering that one program which possibly could win
>>from Brutus is out of the competition now.
>>
>>>Dave
>>
>>Now you're back to reality i hope again.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Vincent
>
>This is all crazy and I'll have nothing to do with it, ever.
>
>bruce
No problem. I suggested it because you seemed to be extremely upset about it.
If you're now willing to shrug it off, you're perfectly entitled to do so.
Dave
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.