Author: KarinsDad
Date: 19:33:36 11/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 1999 at 19:54:22, odell hall wrote: [snip] > > Your are absolutely correct, My post is not hard to understand at all, I have >come to the conclusion that I have some enemies here, Every thing I say, even >the smallest metaphor gets twisted and abused, Yet I am not abusive to anyone >else's post. Having said this I see my time is up here at CCC. It seems that >Kids and obnoxious posters have won the day. I wrote a innocent post trying to >understand the reasons why very strong programs are not commericially availble >(ferret and tiger). I was hopeing that I could get a intelligent post explaining >the reasons why. Luckily I did get two (brucemoreland and David Johnson) Who >explained why it is difficult to publish a program and some of the reasons why >programmers choose not to do. I wrote back to david johnson thanking him for >his insights. Then I get a barrage of garbage and insults from people who >obviously did not read my post carefully. Like everyone else I am a computer >chess addict,I enjoy some of the discussions here. I don't come here to be >insulted, so please if you don't understand my post, either don't reply to it, >or ask me specifically what it is you don't understand. Actually, your post was borderline controversial. Not that it was abusive, but it indirectly pointed a finger at programmers. In fact, we got a complaint about it very early on. However, being a programmer who doesn't yet share his program with anyone, I could understand a programmer's feeling about your post. On the other hand, I wrote back to that complainer indicating that it was not abusive, just annoying. And it may have been mostly annoying to a programmer like myself. The reason: You were questioning mine and other programmer's motives in what they did with their programs when in reality, you had no right to do so (although you gave examples of Ferret and Tiger, you generalized about all programs and hence, all programmers). This does not make you a bad person nor does the response to your post indicate that you have enemies here. It means that your approach was not the best and the subject was controversial. It is unfortunate that some people feel the need to jump all over somebody else in these types of circumstances. I thought David Blackman's (not Johnson's) response to you was very good. However, not everyone responds to a controversial message in such a thoughtful manner. It's difficult to understand when we post that some people will take what we say in a different manner in which it is meant. There is no stopping it. The real problem is that the people who READ the posts are nearly as much to blame for mis-interpretations as the posters. This is very apparent based on some of the replies. If people would just take the time to more carefully write their posts and others would take the time to attempt to make sure that they are not making too strong of a response, the waves would be a little bit smaller. KarinsDad :)
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.