Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 17:23:10 02/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2006 at 19:42:37, Albert Silver wrote: >On February 13, 2006 at 19:17:21, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 13, 2006 at 19:14:13, Albert Silver wrote: >> >>>I honestly don't understand either resignation decision, nor agree with your >>>reasons. Then again, I didn't understand the feelings you felt regarding the >>>dastardliness of Vas, nor the need to protect CCC from him. But that's ok, there >>>is room for diversity in opinion, and as you yourself stated, we're all members, >>>and fully entitled to voice our opinions. >>> >>>People are going to agree and disagree with you. Always. It's normal. What I >>>think is wrong, is to allow that to determine not only your level of >>>participation, but of your enjoyment as well. >>> >>>I honestly can't imagine CCT being better off without you, and I would be >>>*astonished* if even so many as 5% of the participants thought as much. I also >>>don't think the moderation team is better off without you, despite the brouhaha. >>>I'm sorry you've taken this so close to heart, and would suggest taking a few >>>steps back and putting things more into perspective. >>> >> >> >>As a note, I _really_ didn't take Peter's comments to be directed specifically >>at Vas, or any other specific person. > >So I've seen stated here, but what else is one to think of: > >"His (Vasik's) conduct on this board is what I have a problem with. Nothing >more. It is disgusting" Perhaps I can help you out, Albert. I just looked into a German dictionary online and I found something interesting. -disgusting- since Pete connected the term directly to the online behavior or attitude on a forum, I made the following choice in re-translating into English: -disgusting- "dishonest" or "dishonorable" Is that a personal insult OR (this is what I think) is it telling you all "I have a problem with" such "dishonest" forum behavior? Now Pete made crystal clear that the behavior is advertising by a commercial business programmer. Pete has a problem with the apparent chuzpe where Vas violated ยง 4 of the charter. But Vas is just the actual incident. Pete expressed his "having problems with advertising and polling and calling for feedback about this subscription plans". I think we could clearly see that Pete isnt insulting Vas, but he's stating that he has problems with a gap between the charter he must protect as a mod and the actual messages which he judged as forbidden advertisement. Because Pete spoke of his problems we cant accuse him of deliberately insulting or even attacking Vas. So, IMO, what you are creating here, Albert, is a alleged "case" against Pete, although in other sentences you clearly admitted that you wouldnt reproach Pete's decision as false. But if it wasnt false even in your eyes and Pete called it his "having problems" with something he observed, you must or should or could well agree with Bob that Pete didnt chase or scapegoat in special Vasik. Just try to see it from such an angle and you will see that your own harsh verdict all the time is a gross exaggeration. Having said that I admit that Pete's speech could cause doubts for different interpretations and it was clear that Pete became a bit agitated in the run of the many postings he wrote in a very short period of time. At the time I realised his problems and advised him to simply stay out of further debates. NB Pete wasnt agitated because he himself had something wrong to defend - to the contrary, Pete just became nervous because it makes you a bit tense if all others oppose your main opinion or here your decision. I say he was very nice because he wasnt forced to say anything further at all. Language is a hell of bad possibilities. If you like it you can reproach someone of something evil even if he's a saint. A little slip of tongue here or there and you have your result. What I want to say is that I find all your efforts mute because Vasik himself simply is a bit - how to say it - unfair because with his many short answers he 1 pretends to really care about all the members who said something but 2 for the expert in such psychological questions Vasik doesnt rerally answer the questions at all. Here I also quote Bob who has stated that Vas didnt answer in depth exactly in the technical questions! I for one can well call this behavior smart, clever and ingenious, but I cant call it honest or honorable. Excuse me, Albert. This is nothing particularly about Vasik, I would always judge such a gap between pretended openess and true closedness. Of course it takes a man of real smartness to handle this over a longer period of time. I apologize for the rather long analysis but if I could explain a bit the problems and if now we could leave this all behind and find a new start WITH Vas and also Pete, then this wasnt a bad try. Rolf > >And that is one of several. Seeing no mention of commercial programmers in >general, and only one name, I saw no reason to presume it was meant to be >representative of others as well. > > Albert > >>yes, the Rybka posts were the most >>noticable of late. But we went thru the same thing with free fruit and then >>commercial fruit, and probably others that decided to "go commercial" after some >>sort of free-ware success story... >> >>It's just been a recurring theme...
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.