Author: Michel Chassey
Date: 06:20:18 01/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Dann, In response to a 'winging twit attack' I would e-mail a moderator in a flash, but self-moderation says I would not post a reply. In the case of the 'harsh criticism', I would reply only if the 'scrutiny' reveals the 'flaw'. IMHO Michel Chassey ICQ # 34801616 ************** On January 12, 2000 at 00:43:42, Dann Corbit wrote: >Some notions about what is OK and what is not... just my opinions. > >Suppose that someone says, "I think that bishop placement is much more important >than king safety and I can prove it." > >If someone responds, "That's the stupidest thing I have ever heard of!" that is >a bit cheeky, but it is NOT a personal attack. It is an opinion and we all have >the right to hold an opinion. > >On the other hand, if they respond, "You are a whinging twit with a brain the >size of a hydrogen nucleus!" that *IS* a personal attack because it is aimed at >the person and not the statement. > >Even between these two statements, there is gray area. But we should separate >when someone is attacking our ideas and when they are attacking us. If our >ideas cannot stand up to scrutiny (even harsh scrutiny) then perhaps the idea >may really be flawed. > >Ad Hominim attacks are valueless insults that do not demonstrate the point of >discussion. Certainly we should all aim to be as civil as possible. > >Just a thought.
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.