Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 05:32:36 11/13/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 13, 1998 at 08:15:31, Amir Ban wrote: >On November 12, 1998 at 21:51:41, Robert Hyatt wrote: > > >>You get the drift... That was a direct insult, pointed right at deep blue and >>the team behind it. I can see two reasons: (1) anger over the "name" issue. >>(2) jealousy over their accomplishments (aren't we all, but most of us don't >>try to tear them down to build ourselves up). I'd gladly accept another >>explanation... and I have asked specifically for one. But none has been >>forthcoming... only more discussion about the output for Kasparov and the >>like. > >The above paragraph is a gem: Bob is pushing forward his "secret agenda" >theories, and complaining that rather than sticking to the "point" in discussing >my "true motives", I insist on discussing the topic. > >This is quite a bit like the Shaun Graham attack on Bob Hyatt that occurred here >where he pressed a ridiculous point with self-righteous anger to the extent that >he ignored every other consideration. > >I'm indeed trying to stick to the topic, because it interests me and there are >things to say, and I'm trying hard to resist Bob's efforts to derail this to >irrelevant channels, annoying as they are. > >Amir I asked you a point-blank question... you have refused to answer or even touch on the issue. I'll ask again, and let *you* derail this again: How do you justify the insane statement by Shay in the last paragraph, that specifically states that DB "carefully avoided any computer vs computer games after losing to Fritz in 1995"? I've asked you three times before, *exactly* which computer vs computer events did they avoid after 1995. I also answered this by saying *none* becuase there were *no* computer vs computer events held *after* 1995 except for the WMCCC where DB is not eligible to compete. Now, how about an answer to that? What part of that statement by Shay is defensible? And if you can't find any part, then what is the "motive" for making such a gross journalistic error? And *then* you see why I would propose that there is an ulterior agenda here, because no one in their right mind would write something so blatantly false and misleading. *still* waiting for an explanation as I'd *really* like to be shown that this was just a simple error or whatever, rather than something "deeper." I don't have any dislike for either of you... but I *don't* like shoddy journalism. If his "article" made it into a public document, and *I* wrote it, I would consider running and hiding so the lawyers couldn't find me...
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.