Author: Micheal Cummings
Date: 16:59:33 12/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 18, 1998 at 15:51:22, Mike Saavedra wrote: >On December 18, 1998 at 14:51:27, Lanny DiBartolomeo wrote: > >>On December 18, 1998 at 14:01:28, Mike Saavedra wrote: >> >>>On December 18, 1998 at 03:20:13, Micheal Cummings wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>>It is just sad that you (KK) do not seem to realise that what you say is offensive, I >>>>see you a nominated on the moderator list. hmmmm, not on my list anymore. >>> >>>Michael, I still don't understand WHY it's offensive. Does it offend you? Why? >>>CM6000 doesn't care, its an inanimate object. KK hasn't insulted anyone or used >>>vulgarity. He just expressed his opinion on this program. He's entitled to that. >>>You are entitled to disagree his assessment and challenge it. It creates lively >>>debate. Nonetheless, if consider someone's statements offensive, perhaps you can >>>explain to whom he is being offensive, since you can only offend a human being. >> >>As you Know I am sure and many others here that several heated descussions about >>cm6000 Have taken place over this type of "talk" K K also says the title was >>meant to get peoples attention,Now why do you suppose he would figure this would >>get peoples attention Hmmm... Not much thought needs to go in this ,dont you >>agree? He has not ever started out a review like this another small proof of the >>statement,He is a very smart chess reviewer for sure and when a product gets >>reviewed it is stating good points bad points and then if this gets fixed then >>it will be a great product so on and so on.So of course it was another negative >>shot at cm6000 and for K K to to phrase it like this to stir a response (and it >>is what he did he states it by saying he wanted to get peoples attention) I do >>not like because if you know a product is good and there saying its not then it >>will be offending just like with fritz5 a lot of people were defending it like >>it was their child as a matter of fact alot who now are saying why are you >>cm6000 fans getting so upset. I am prepared to bring up a bunch of chess >>positions in which the "favorite" chess engines cant solve and cm6000 can >>and there are alot!! then I am going to say what is the point of the analysis >>feature in program A if the engine isnt strong enough to get it RIGHT! >>Hmmm.. I wonder what the response will be? > >Hmmm, I prefer Fritz but if someone told me it sucked or it was a piece of junk >(for whatever reason), I may debate the merits of the claim, but why would I >find it offensive??? Why would I be offended if someone didn't like my favourite >program. So what? Michael Cummings has used the word "offensive" pretty often, I >just don't get it. Sure some people may want to debate KK's claim, yet I don't >see it as a personal knock against anybody. And as I mentioned, you can only >offend a human being. So who is offended and why? Certainly CM6000 can't! Okay I will tell you why it is offensive, not just because I like the program, but I think Mindscape would find it offensive as well. I take you to a series of moderator questions posts, And a question was asked if someone called Chessbase shit how would you handle it, Well I would remove the post because it is an opinion that carried with it a comment that is to invoke a response and give rises to people attacking it each other and to them bring in personal attacks. Plus it is a bullshit post. HE can state what is wrong with it, but them throwing insults in as well, that does not wash with me. And I think the reason why I am so offended is because I like KK and what he writes but this time he did wrong, most people see it, but he is just digging himself in further because he will not say that he should have not used Toy in his remarks. For all those who cannot read what Toy means in his post, it means he is saying CM6000 IS A PIECE OF SHIT - Other people can see this That kind of post has no place on here because it is plain bullshit, State what is wrong with the program, but LEAVE out the insults, they are not funny and I do not think wanted here, post it on r.g.c.c KK. He has the right to call it anything he wants too. But if defaming a product just for the joy of it I do not think is right. He has given a review and because of late there have been so many CM6K posts, I believe he is just getting a little fed up with them all and jumped on the band wagon of throwing in little jibes because he is picking on a very small point and putting a big statement on it to cause an inflamed comment. What was KK comments meant to tell us, is he going to post all that is wrong with CM6K one by one over the next weeks and throw in a few cracks as well each time to something he has already stated in his reviews.
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.