Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 11:38:14 05/07/99
Hi ED: Pretty and wise words were yours. On the contrary of what is the current though here, solution is not to implement new systems of control, but just to recognize from the beginning free speech, without other limits that extreme and unacceptable personal attacks. What kind of madness has taken the minds of smart people that really pretend to do of a human place where discussion is the core at thje same time a peaceful, courteous place? We have no more but even less fight that in any average human group, but even that seems to be too much. Please... "But what is the limit" many can argue, "respect personal attacks?" Well, this is not an academical issue. You do not need to engage in a deep search to recognize what is extreme; there are some in-built definitions of it that we share as a matter if fact. No neccesary a pedantic exercize of definitions. Anybody can detect an unacceptable insult when he see it. Many valuable people that was somewhat sarcastical but not neccesarily insulting would be still here If we would have had from the beggining a more open mind about this. Once you have defined that this is a place for free speech about chess computer and not an Orwell site where the most important thing is avoiding flaming, once you define this place like one where we discuss chess computers in most of the cases but also other stuff if ocasion arises -and in other language from time to time if so please some poster-, then many things follow suit: first, you must have or develop a capacity to resist criticism without believing that your ego is being putted in trial because of that; if you have not that virtue, better to abandon this and any other kind of colective engagement. Second, a capacity for resisting even -beyond criticism- a degree of personal attack as a matter of fact of life when debate arises; if you believe you are so important nobody has the righ to flame you a little in the hot of discussion, then you are a sad, weak soul, urgently needed of some kind of siquiatric help. Third, a capacity to know that in ocasions, no matter how much smart you are or you believe you are, you will say a nonsense and so you will be flamed with reason; if you cannot withdstand that, better to go. Maybe this is precisely the case. Please, flame at your will. You welcome. So, paradoxical as can appears, Ed is right: less, not more rules; more, not less tolerance to off-topic posts. And the core of it: a lot less egotism, that childish attitude that cannot resist any touch to his sensible skins and at once to the lap of the moderators asking for for a revenge. Curious: tough positions about control seems to be the virtue and features of strong people, but it is all the contrary. Fernando
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.