Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 17:05:24 09/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 08, 2004 at 19:30:28, Albert Silver wrote: >On September 08, 2004 at 11:46:53, Daniel Clausen 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. >> >>I wish people would debate with a bit less energy here. ;) Personally, I won't >>donate anything as long as CCC/CTF is hosted together, but that's it. I'm not on >>a crusade against CTF as many other CCC-members seem to be. I realize that by >>not donating, I put CCC to a risk as well, but I'm willing to do that. YMMV (tm >>Dann) > >In which case you are on a crusade. Not in words, but in actions. You surely have a loose definition of being on a crusade. ;) Look, I don't support CCC and CTF going together. You apparently do. Neither of us is on a crusade - we're just not agreeing on something. That happens daily in democratic environments. You could ask "so why are you here now? Aren't you supporting CCC/CTF going together this way? But as soon as money is involved you don't donate? Sounds like an excuse to me!". Well, for me both things are different in principle. (it may not be for you, which is ok with me :) So it is a principle decision, so to speak, not really about 50USD or whatever the donation would be. You're free to believe that or not of course.. (sheesh, so much tolerance - such a post in CTF and it might explode ;) >Is that what you think will happen? The way I see it, CTF members have not only >covered their end, the CTF expenses were all covered by a single member, but >also more than half of CCC as well. I don't buy that calculation anyway. Do you think the 250USD (or whatever it was) will be sufficient if CCC would go away completely? AFAIK CTF and CCC don't have their own hardware nor uplink, so the calculation is fundamentally flawed. Not that it would matter to me in this discussion really, since it's not a question of how much money _for me_. >I rather imagine Steve will see the same thing. All you are showing is >the lesser value you attribute to CCC. That's fine with me. We're in a free world. (sort of) Steve and others can think what they want (not meant in a negative tone!). Doesn't change the reasons _I_ have for myself to do something or not. Sargon
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.