Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Philosophy of Moderation

Author: Detlef Pordzik

Date: 07:07:24 12/24/98

Go up one level in this thread


On December 24, 1998 at 09:08:48, Fernando Villegas wrote:

>Dear david:
>I agree with you. All the examples yuou have given to me are related to personal
>attacks of one sort or another and that, of course, cannot be accepted. In fact,
>I saw the war in RGCC about Indonesia and what did of it a nightmare were NOT
>the reasons, arguments, data, etc given about it, BUT the personal attacks
>between the people engaged in the debate. The problem is, once again, the
>tendence to attack and this one you can meet een in purely chess computer
>discussion. So, the problem is not the content of thge thread, but the attitude,
>the prdominance of ego considerations, the fool idea that if you stop to answer
>a post it's equal to resign your position in a public confrontation. EGO is the
>sin, here as elsewhere. And that we are not going to cure just restricting the
>issue to this or that stuff. I prefer a nice, witty discussion about beer that a
>hotted, unpleasant and personalized discussion about programs.
>By the eay, anyway, I agree with your attitude in 98% and that's reason I voted
>for you with Larry T. and another guy.
>Be lucky and merry christmas
>fernando

From my personal point of view - I could - and do - nicely tolerate " off topics
" - it ain't that sure at all, what's a " topic " or not - lots of personal
influences + sights might be involved.
The REAL point for me - where all tolerancy ends - is the mean behaviour of the
mentioned kinds....this counts.......

Eh - off topic :

Merry Christmas + a sacred New Year, Fernando

D.P.
a.k.a. ELVIS




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.