Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 12:31:38 04/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 09, 2003 at 08:19:14, Chessfun wrote: >On April 09, 2003 at 08:03:22, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On April 08, 2003 at 22:18:13, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>You can label it what you want. But, note I have on record arguments with a few >>>members aside from you and I wouldn't want any of them banned, well excluding >>>Cummings in CTF but that's another story. Fact is my opinion of your posts are >>>the vast majority are nothing more than trolls, as was this thread when you >>>posted your comments into it, see it has nothing to do with your "Friend" >>>labels. >>> >>>Sarah. >> >> >>What you estimate as trolls are my thoughts. > >Let's examine your thoughts as first posted in this thread. I quote "Chessfun >and Reagan are highly aggressive and negative at times."....hmmm thought or >troll....still looks like a troll to me. Two points. You see, again I begin to think! Look, how that works... :) 1) The topic here is not about CC. 2) But still I showed my usual class and gave a true copy of my memory. And then I wrote simply the truth. Tough for you if you see yourself different. > >> Of course you can't cope with it >>because you are occupied with transcribing autoplayed "test"-results which is >>already a full-time job. NB I would NEVER blame you for your preferences, but in >>your case where it's so obvious that you suck power out of *nothing* but you >>hate everything else that you can't understand, I must insist on a >>differentiated view on things. Or let me use your own vocabulary. Your posted >>test-results are nothing but trolls with zero content. I am sorry. > > >Yes indeed, little doubt you are right, to post test results is indeed a >troll.!?. Third point... You must learn to read. Very important. Testresults trolls? Not automatically. But in your case yes. Interesting that you avoided to doubt my diagnosis of your aggressivity. I knew that you knew it. >And they are clearly trolls to you as you have little interest in >computer chess excluding of course critiquing others....or let's just say >trolling ;-) Good example for your limitations. No wonder you can't follow me. 4.) I have big interest in CC. I play MYSELF against the progs/ engines, while you only copy and past the results from your automatic games eng - eng. You are not interested in CC. You like to play model railway. But that is not chess. What you do, yes, is complete nonsense. Without a reasonable sense. What you do is already done by SSDF. Sorry over there... :) I see redundancy for miles around. Of course without validity. Apart from these aspects I like SSDF very much. 5.) You say that I have no interest in CC but I like the critic against others. In a way you are correct. I have no interest in YOUR version of CC! I have only interest in CC on a complex level and this level starts with critical reflections. Without critics you can't approach such a field as CC which is part of chess and even has academic roots. However what you do is counting marbles of different colors. :) I see no obstacle why we couldn't become friends. But you should tame your aggressions. I am helpless against aggressive women. Do you want to learn chess? Let's play some games. Nice regards, Rolf > > ><rest of troll snipped> > >Sarah.
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.