Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 16:54:43 12/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2003 at 17:40:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 10, 2003 at 08:22:22, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On December 10, 2003 at 03:22:44, Peter Kappler wrote: >> >>>On December 09, 2003 at 21:18:39, Roger D Davis wrote: >>> >>>>>>>FWIW, I have the highest arbiter certification awarded by the Chess Federation of Canada: National Tournament Director. >>>> >>>>You've started what has turned out to be an enormous thread, and you've openly >>>>stated your credentials in doing so. Reading the responses, my sympathies lie >>>>with the other posters. I would like to ask, however, that you defend your >>>>perspective. If you truly believe that those who disagree need to reexamine the >>>>rules or their own logic, this shouldn't be hard to do. >>>> >>>>Roger >>> >>>Perhaps after reading the responses he realizes he's wrong. :) >>> >>>-Peter >> >>I doubt it. He posted due to a request, and wasn't intending to fight about it. >>Besides, he's been treated with contempt! Why should he be bothered to reply, >>only to be attacked by a pack of wolves? >> >>Terry > > >He was attacked with facts and experience. I suspect he recognizes the concept >of "untenable position" pretty well... The _key_ word here is _attacked_ and that isn't the correct way to present your facts. It's insultive, and I doubt he intented to argue regardless of how the facts were presented. Although, I have no doubt he could make strong arguements that would have led to the suffocation of the board. So what we be the point?
This page took 0.01 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.