Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Good thing that Ruffian didn't compete at Graz!!!

Author: Arturo Ochoa

Date: 21:20:05 11/27/03

Go up one level in this thread


On November 28, 2003 at 00:15:55, Arturo Ochoa wrote:

>On November 28, 2003 at 00:13:08, David Dahlem wrote:
>
>>On November 28, 2003 at 00:11:13, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>
>>>On November 28, 2003 at 00:06:19, David Dahlem wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 27, 2003 at 23:53:50, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Unless you can show the false statements that people are saying, there is no
>>>>>>slander or libel here. If I say, "I think it is likely that Vincent did it,"
>>>>>>that is not slander or libel. If I say, "I have first hand knowledge that
>>>>>>Vincent intentionally fabricated evidence to mislead the ICGA to get List
>>>>>>disqualified," AND you can prove that I am lying, AND you can prove that my
>>>>>>intent in saying that was to cause damage to the reputation of Vincent, then it
>>>>>>is possible that there is slander or libel.
>>>>>
>>>>>If you accuse somebody about something that is false is slander and libel.
>>>>>Diepeveen is being acussed of being the responsible of the List Case. If you
>>>>>cannot understand that this is slander or libel, I point out you the
>>>>>definitions:
>>>>>
>>>>>Slander: to say untrue things about someone in order to damage other people“s
>>>>>good opinion of them.
>>>>>
>>>>>Libel: an act of writing or printing untrue statements about someone so that
>>>>>other people are likely to have a bad opinion.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>When you establish or say untrue things about Vincent Diepeveen such as the List
>>>>>Case, you are creating a bad belief of this person. How can you call it?
>>>>>
>>>>>Accusing him about the List Case is slander.
>>>>
>>>>And what is it called when someone falsely accusses a programmer of plagarism?
>>>>
>>>
>>>The same. I dont agree with any case if your proofs are circunstancial.
>>>
>>>>Regards
>>>>Dave
>>>
>>>Regards, Arturo.
>>
>>Doesn't the article at the chessbase site say this case was about circumstantial
>>evidence?
>>
>
>I am not who to establish that. The ICGA has their rules and you ask them
>directly for this. I wont mixture topics. My point has been very clear about
>Vincent Diepeveen.
>
>Regards, Arturo.

The same in better english:

I am not the appropiated person to establish that. The ICGA People has their own
rules and you should ask them directly for this. I wont mix topics here. My
point has been very clear about Vincent Diepeveen.

Cheers, Arturo.



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.