Author: A. Steen
Date: 15:19:15 11/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
Messrs Penn and Culp, Firstly, I do not know you at all, and I do not know Mr Skinner at all, and I know nothing of the "Arena debate" at all. Mr Skinner's deletion of the thread yesterday was absolutely correct, as it was simply an invitation for every passing poster to libel me, and troll me. It had no chessic content at all, let alone computer-chessic. In fact the thrust of a number of the posts were that my chess analysis was superior but notwithstanding that I should be removed from this board (my crime being to correct the mistakes of others). While I did not in any way solicit the moderator intervention and/or subsequent deletions, my rights under natural justice to refute some fairly odious tilts against me were better served by Mr Skinner's action than by such responses from myself that I permitted. This is a discussion board about computer chess. If there are to be insults (but, why?), they should at least be on-topic. In the deleted thread, they too were off-topic. Please accept that criticism of Mr Skinner for heavy-handedness in this specific matter (I can't speak about any other matter) is wholly and totally without justification. I read and archived every post in that thread. Except that it would wholly defeat the purpose of his deletions to regurgitate the nonsense that he deleted, I would provide some excerpts to show that what he did was correct. Since I shall not, please accept my word for it. The offending message was not by Djordje, his post was just one in the whole deleted thread. He had posted entirely in defence of me, which, given the utter viciousness and even malice of some of the attacks against me, is not a wise thing to do. I will thank Djordje separately. My own view on censorship is that it is extremely undesirable except in the most extreme cases (not applicable in this case - my murder had not been (yet) solicited), or when the discussion moves so severely off-topic that it must be truncated for the general good (applicable in this case). I favour a robust exchange of views. For myself, I seldom exchange a "view" (this post is one exception) as I concentrate on objective matters, capable of being analysed and a result (binary i.e. "True/False", or other) extracted. I will not allow myself to be chased off this board by people whose logic has been demonstrated to be at fault, and who cannot handle it and resort to abuse, insult and worse. If an error is discovered in my writing (typographical ones excepted, please), I am more than grateful and will heartily thank the corrector and be grateful I have learned something. Those who stop learning simply yield a great harvest for those of us who don't. :) It may give you background to study: http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?463219 and the subthread from: http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?463426 :) Best, A.S. On November 23, 2005 at 15:42:19, Barry Culp wrote: >On November 23, 2005 at 09:53:36, William Penn wrote: > >>Ordinarily I ignore such things because getting on the bad side of a moderator >>is not wise... :) I didn't notice your particular message. However I have >>noticed that one of the moderators is apparently going hyperbolic recently with >>some debatable but clean messages deleted. Nothing to do except vote for a >>different moderator next time. >>WP > >I agree with William Penn. A while back, there was a long ugly "debate" on CCC >between P Skinner and members of the Arena team. I believe C Conkie was part of >that "debate". More recently, P Skinner deleted another C Conkie thread that >related to Chessbase GUI support and a graphics bug in the Fritz 9 GUI.. a bug >which I have also observed. Even Ed Schröder, who is a moderator on Chess >Thinkers Forum, challenged the reasons given by P Skinner for deleting the >thread. > >Looking forward to the next round of moderator elections
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.