Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:46:10 01/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2000 at 11:58:41, robert michelena wrote:
>For commenting without facts.
>
>I cannot speak for david ballard, but as far as I am concerned, certain
>moderators here took sides when I posted my honest opinion that average, non
>master strength players, could not defeat commmercial chess programs under
>tournament time control. I am sorry if it caused dismay among certain elements
>here, but that is my honest opinion.
>
> These moderators did not comment about the uncivility of the forum when others
>insulted me, but when I said something in my defense, then all of a sudden, I
>was the one who was being obnoxious. If this is what a civilized forum stands
>for, selective persecution, then by all means, delete me.
>
>Please get the facts straight Jarri.
I think opinions are fine, and welcome here. But if someone doesn't agree with
one, then the argument should be based on data and merit, and not resort to
name-calling and insults.
IE you don't believe a non-GM can beat a program. I _know_ I have done so
several times (not often enough to be anywhere near happy about it, maybe
not one of 20 games, but _definitely_ more than zero) and I have seen others do
it several times, both in person and on the net. So in my case it isn't an
opinion, it is a simple statement of fact. But I don't deem it worthwhile to
participate in a discussion where it degrades to insults when opinion and fact
don't match.
I am reminded of my favorite "obscene fortune" from "fortune -o" in Unix:
"Opinions are like a**holes. Everybody has one, and nobody wants to
look at anyone elses."
:)
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.