Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 13:07:09 10/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 2003 at 20:39:09, Uri Blass wrote:
>On October 16, 2003 at 20:04:22, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On October 16, 2003 at 15:50:33, Mridul Muralidharan wrote:
>>
>>>On October 16, 2003 at 14:40:01, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 16, 2003 at 05:54:37, Mridul Muralidharan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On October 15, 2003 at 23:28:23, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On October 15, 2003 at 15:32:39, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On October 15, 2003 at 15:16:28, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On October 15, 2003 at 14:25:40, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On October 14, 2003 at 22:37:15, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Instead of searching for an example of Vincent attacking somebody in a post, try
>>>>>>>>>>>to search for the opposite example (Vincent not attacking anybody in a post).
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Good luck...
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>But well... We all LOVE Vincent. That must be love, as he is allowed in every
>>>>>>>>>>>message to violate the CCC charter without being banned. Actually without even
>>>>>>>>>>>being warned.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Peace on Earth and on CCC! :)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Christophe
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Greetings, Mr Theron.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>With all my respect that you deserves due to your strong engine. I hope you can
>>>>>>>>>>solve the violent traffic bettween you and Vincent in the coming Dutch Open.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Vincent creates "violent traffic" between him and everybody else. There is not
>>>>>>>>>much that can be done about it...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I dont see with good eyes, coming from the Author of a Top Engine such as Tiger,
>>>>>>>>>>insults without a good reason.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>I am still waiting your apologies from this
>>>>>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?319392 message when you offended
>>>>>>>>>>Mridul without a logic reason, underestimating his professional profile. I did
>>>>>>>>>>not see any reason for your personal attack against him.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I cannot access to the content of this message anymore.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>What did I say? I do not remember.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I do not remember exactly the words but as far as I remember
>>>>>>>>when you supported me you said that mridul has no chess program that he
>>>>>>>>developed or at least gave doubts about it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I found the words in a reply to reply to reply to your post that still did not
>>>>>>>diappear
>>>>>>>I am not going to post a link because it is going to diappear in a short time
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Here are your words:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>You are talking without knowing Uri, obviously.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>You are also talking about commputer chess without really knowing, I fear.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I guess that the second sentence is the sentence that Arturo and Vincent meant.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>OK, I remember that post now. And I stand by what I have said.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Christophe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Which is ?
>>>>>Can you elaborate so as to make your stand clear ?
>>>>>
>>>>>Mridul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>What is not clear in the post we are talking about?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christophe
>>>
>>>
>>>What is the part that you "And I stand by what I have said."
>>>
>>>Considering that I cant seem to get that post by making a search in ccc archives
>>>, I dont think I can re-post your exact words.
>>>
>>>But the gist of your post was to seriously try to cast doubts on my abilities on
>>>writing a chess engine without in any way trying to validate the possible truth
>>>behind what you were insinuating.
>>>
>>>I felt it below my standard to respond to your post at that time , but such
>>>repeated remarks required that I speak out against it.
>>>
>>>It maybe a different issue that you be the author of the worlds greatest or
>>>worst chess program , but please do not take that as a license to try to
>>>admonish others.
>>>
>>>Without saying anything constructive in your post , you were chiding me for what
>>>I posted - not because it was technically correct or wrong (if wrong - then
>>>definitely it stands to reason to disprove it : and I will stand corrected and
>>>apologise for my mistake !) - but because in your limited information , you did
>>>not perceive that I maybe knowing what I'm talking about.
>>>
>>>I think it was a mistake on my part to act honourably - I should have responded
>>>back to you then and there and not expected a honourable behaviour from you.
>>>
>>>So I would be better if you dont take it upon yourself to act as the policeman
>>>and allow others the freedom of expressing their views freely.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Mridul
>>
>>
>>
>>Your objection to the post in question is approximately the same objection I had
>>about your post to Uri.
>>
>>If you don't appreciate the way I have answered to you, then I think you can
>>understand why one would not appreciate the way you had answered to Uri.
>>
>>Let's make a deal: if you can understand my point of view and admit that your
>>original post to Uri wasn't very friendly and apologize, I will apologize for my
>>answer to you and we will all stay in good terms.
>>
>>I don't know you, so I have nothing against you. So let's make a step toward
>>each other and forget about this.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>Everything is ok.
>
>He already sent me an email in the same day that he posted his post when he said
>that he did not mean to offend me and he hopes that I did not take his post in
>that sense.
>
>I replied that there is no problem.
>
>Uri
It would have been really nice to post this message here instead than in
private, maybe?
So I guess there is no problem anymore?
Christophe
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.