Author: Reinhard Scharnagl
Date: 02:20:32 07/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2005 at 04:55:08, F. Huber wrote: >On July 23, 2005 at 01:38:18, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: > >>watching some contributions lacking of background information I felt the need >>to supply some readable facts instead of opinions. > >Well, in the meantime I know your approach: >Everything that _you_ say is a ´fact´, everthing _others_ say is only their >´opinion´! ;-) Franz, you should know it better. In SMKs interview concerning X-FEN there has been an unreserved comment: "Those extensions have not been to my taste" (what in my opinion describes best that conflict) and a lot of very dubious and unfounded statements: "The extension will cause errors", (?) "Similiar looking FEN positions will have a different meaning", (?) and finally "Chess960 finally is not compatible to traditional Chess" (?) without any proof, probably because of the fact, that such does not exist. So what could be named better matching to "defamation campain" than such unfounded attacks against a working extended FEN concept. >>All what was to be found has been an interview of SMK in CSS-Online, making >>subjective unmotivated attacks and statements most beside of reality. > >Sorry, but _who_ is here far away from reality? >_You_ started (and still continue) a defamation campain against SMK and the >new Shredder FEN format, but not reverse! >And that´s a fact - not only my opinion ... That of course could be an impression, which would be shared by others. But in fact there have been attempts to reach an agreement before the new Shredder FEN has been published, being completely blocked by SMK. Thus the escalation has been started by spreading that contradicting concept, not by me commenting this. Reinhard.
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.