Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Regarding CCC/CTF relationships

Author: Ulrich Tuerke

Date: 04:29:30 09/08/04

Go up one level in this thread


On September 08, 2004 at 07:22:38, Kurt Utzinger wrote:

>On September 08, 2004 at 06:50:10, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
>
>>On September 08, 2004 at 06:30:45, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>
>>>On September 08, 2004 at 05:53:18, Gerd Isenberg wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 08, 2004 at 02:55:32, Kurt Utzinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On September 08, 2004 at 02:11:29, Jonas Bylund wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 08, 2004 at 01:52:31, Lin Harper wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>   The two groups exist in parallel, and have done for some years now. When it
>>>>>>>came to light that we should all help pick up the tab for the maintaining of the
>>>>>>>server, a certain amount of ill will set in, at least for a few people.
>>>>>>>   A couple of guys on CCC inferred that to make a donation would be to show
>>>>>>>support for CTF, a forum they don't like because of the perceived mood and lack
>>>>>>>of manners of a lot of CTF posters.
>>>>>>>  CTF members generally have at least a passing interest in computer chess too.
>>>>>>>Most of them have several chess playing programs. It's a safe bet they read CCC,
>>>>>>>even if they rarely post. And being established as friends on CTF, they fire
>>>>>>>broadsides at each other in the knowledge that there is generally no lasting ill
>>>>>>>will. If you would care to start dropping into CTF regularly and joining in a
>>>>>>>bit, you may even start enjoying the good natured atmosphere.
>>>>>>>  We are really just parts 'a' and 'b' of the same group. If either group were
>>>>>>>to disappear, the administrative cost would be virtually unchanged, so it's not
>>>>>>>a matter of one group subsidising the other.
>>>>>>>  best regards
>>>>>>>  Lin Harper
>>>>>>
>>>>>>During this debate i have frequently read the CTF forum to be sure if it was as
>>>>>>bad as i remembered it and i found it to be even worse... I see no friendly
>>>>>>atmosphere other than a couple of nice guys from the CCC forum once in a while
>>>>>>joking with eachother, but besides from that it is a horrible place IMO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't see how them having a passing interest in computer chess have anything
>>>>>>to with CTF as computer chess is virtually never discussed there and having a
>>>>>>chessprogram does not qualify in my book as being on topic :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"A couple of guys on CCC inferred that to make a donation would be to show
>>>>>>support for CTF" i wouldn't say it was "a couple of guys" i got the impression
>>>>>>that a lot of guys from the CCC forum felt that way.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>To me it is not a question of saving money to drop CTF, it is a question of
>>>>>>princibles, i find that place to be bad and i don't want to donate to a forum
>>>>>>that is associated with it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>      Hi Jonas
>>>>>      I fully agree with you. I am wondering why some people
>>>>>      regularly try to play down CTF to a normal forum.
>>>>>      Kurt
>>>>
>>>>Hi Kurt,
>>>>
>>>>sorry, what is a "normal" forum?
>>>>
>>>>I agree that there is a lot of junk in CTF, but also brilliant posts about
>>>>various topics. CTF, even moderated, is a kind of anarchic - free speach has
>>>>some drawbacks sometimes.
>>>>
>>>>Even if i don't post there regulary, reading CTF is often a kind awareness
>>>>widening for me, to learn about how various people from different cultures talk
>>>>and think about antisemitism, terrorism and other political, religious and
>>>>social topics.
>>>>
>>>>I guess without CTF, CCC-moderators will have an even harder job here to act on
>>>>off topic posts. Therefore all CCC-members profit from CTF, whether they like it
>>>>or not.
>>>>
>>>>Using and profit from CCC for free in the past, but suddenly question CTF due to
>>>>a voluntary donation looks like a double moral standard to me.
>>>>
>>>>Cheers,
>>>>Gerd
>>>
>>>       Hi Gerd
>>>       It is true: I seldom visit CTF and has never posted
>>>       there.  But what I have lately seen there regarding
>>>       terrorism was sufficient for me to conclude that CTF
>>>       is not a "normal" forum where such things would be
>>>       be cancelled on the spot and where the writers would
>>>       be banned by cancelling their passwords.
>>>       Kurt
>>
>>Look Kurt, the problem is to say, what is "normal".
>
>     That's true indeed.
>     Kurt
>
>>Usually, we consider something as being "normal" in case it fits into our
>>standard European view of the world. For instance, "our" media are reporting
>>pictures and opinions about Near East in a way which differs a lot from the
>>reports in USA and Israel.
>>It's then natural to assume that opinions which are deviating so much from our
>>standard wisdom must be due to bad intentions; they must be purely
>>propagandistic. But that's a mistake and what you reply may very well insult
>>other posters.
>
>      If so, I can confirm that this was of course
>      not my intention. Some misunderstandings may
>      also be due to my insufficient knowledge of
>      the English language. It's often difficult
>      for me to distinguish the nuances.

Sorry Kurt. It seems that you have got me wrong. I did not want to say that this
post of yours had insulted anybody. It surely hasn't.
It seems that I have expressed myself unfortunately. Your post was 100% ok.

BTW, that's another interesting benefit of ctf. I think that I am constantly
improving English language since I had started the visits there.

Regards,
Uli

>      Kurt
>
>Listening to "unnormal" postings may well mean that we are just
>>in the process of learning to drop one of our prejudices. And imho that's quite
>>a lot - of course much more than ccc will ever be able to accomplish.
>>
>>Nevertheless, it is of course true that the level of insults in ctf is a bit
>>high. When reading posts there, one has to filter; this helps.
>>
>>Uli



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.