Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 20:20:21 11/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 27, 2005 at 22:21:12, Chessfun wrote: >On November 27, 2005 at 20:07:12, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On November 27, 2005 at 15:23:33, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On November 27, 2005 at 11:06:28, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>Just for the record and to you as a challenge: >>>> >>>>I asked Graham, the other moderator, to show me insults by A.S., then he replied >>>>that they were all deleted. Then I repeated my question and begged him to show >>>>me one single piece of evidence. He couldn't! And he explained that chessplayers >>>>are known to be a bit eccentric and such. Steen hadn't had real insults in his >>>>messages at all! But it was his special speech that was taken as insulting by >>>>the members. >>> >>>Here is a bit of his "Special Speech" for you. >>> >>>"If you look here- >>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?463395 >>>you will find a weak player beating Fruit 2.2.1." >>> >>>Sarah. >> >> >>Thanks, I've read that, but couldn't find the insult. Would you please lead me >>to the center of the insult in this message? I'm no native speaker, olease dont >>forget that. Thanks. > >Ok let's see how to make it clearer. > >If you look at this post you will see a WEAK player beat Fruit 2.2.1. If you >managed to follow the link you will see a post from Uri Blass. > >Therefore Uri Blass is a weak player. > >Sarah. Yes. Now I understood, thank you. I had already a little exchange with Uri, not knowing this piece of evidence. I couldn't understand why Uri, as someone a bit disappointed, told me I'm a strong player, stronger than most in tournaments. In the meantime someone wrote Uri had something in the 2000 Elo. So if we take all this together it's not something I would insinuate an insult against Uri. Sarah, let me describe what A.S. probably had in mind. But at first remember please that A.S. called himself also a patzer! That is a typical chess understatement, but a patzer literally is weaker than a weak player. I want to explain that such vocabulary is not made for a mathematical scale from zero idiot up to super duper GM. - And more - to your displeasement and also mine A.S. stayed anonymous. We can like it or not, but we should realise that if he wants to do that, that he then is forced to use a couple of confusioning statements. So in that case you dont even know if he meant it seriously or tongue in cheek! And that is then a question of education, if you, or anyone else, takes such a game as an insult or as a joke. It's like a poker session. You believe it or not. I want to explain that you cant define as the only possibility that he was seriously insulting Uri as a weak player or if he wanted to say "folks yo claimed that no weak player could beat FRUIT, but look here, here is a weak player who did it". If we understand the statement this way, it's clear that the argument wasn't against Uri in the first place, but Uri was just an example that could (logically correct) refutate the thesis of the members. If you make the claim that nobody weak could, then I'll show you someone weak who did it. It becomes even funnier if then the members and also Uri claim that he isnt weak at all. Honestly I dont know what weak is if not 2000 Elo. There was a time when a tournament beginner automatically got at least 2200 Elo to have at least the chance to make some calculations. I'm even more surprised that Uri claims not being weak with 2000 because I am comparable with him and I would see me STRONG in comparing me with beginners, amateurs who only play at home for fun and weaker clubplayers, BUT in comparison with strong experts, masters and GM I am a lousy nut. I see absoltely no problem do talk about my own strength. And look I have still fun in chess. And computerchess. It is important IMO that we all make a differentiation between our own life and the fun we have, our talents and our families and kids AND how we possibly are judged on a bigger scale where we have in chess many stronger players above us. We wont commit suicide, no? It is still beyond my mind why we here in this fine environment couldn't keep a minimum of politness towards either a good player or someone who wanted to be funny. What was at stake that so many insulted this man so viciously. Because EVEN if he had used a somewhat spicy speech it wasnt justified to call him loudmouth or indicating him into the psychiatric realm. To you I must admit that now your message was very friendly, calm and patient, without any nitpicks and I want to thank you. But alone to mention such a normalty shows us that we have here in seconds the possibility that people take offences and react with insults. And that in a somewhat techno field in a hobby that can give so much fun. Had you personally the impression that Steen became a danger to you having fun and so on? It would be such a pity for all of us. But let's keep it here; I have touched already so many sensitive spots. So if that would go deeper then people could react with unforeseeable temper. MOst of the time we dont want to have the feeling that we are - so called - analysed. We dont want to know who we really are. Of course this leads to misconceptions. I want to thank you that I got the chance to write this message mostly inspired through your surprising message, when I had hoped I would now see the first real insults. - Please excuse my typos, it was a late night letter. Good night. Rolf
This page took 0.01 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.