Author: Pete Galati
Date: 23:42:06 01/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2000 at 23:13:37, KarinsDad wrote: >On January 25, 2000 at 22:51:21, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On January 25, 2000 at 22:37:04, Pete Galati wrote: >>[snip] >>>Is he or isn't he banned? If he did indeed pull the plug on his own membership, >>>then why even discuss it(?) other than that, at this point, I'd like to know if >>>that _is_ what happened, that's also not very clear. >> >>He is banned. KD just forgot. > >Bella is banned. There is a lot of evidence that Bella is Chris, hence, Dann >thinks that Chris is banned. Chris' account is not banned. The question comes >down to what people think about "if Bella is banned, does that mean Chris is >banned?". > >> >>I don't see any problem with reinstating someone. As long as the moderators >>still have the power to kick the plug out of the wall if the TV catches on fire. > >In reality, I guess what this boils down to is whether the forum thinks we >should reinstate Bella/Chris the person, not the account. > >KarinsDad :) Since I wasn't around when Chris (as himself) was here, my reaction to Bella; I was not as irritated by Bella (as some were) while she was here originally, she became very annoying when it became evident how deceptive the person was. First, why take the name of a fashion designer? Because while I'm willing to say, ok, a punk fashion designer could indeed have a great deal of knowlage about computer Chess in general, but then when a fashion designer starts spouting out large amounts of knowlage about the workings of a Chess program that's way over my head, now I have a problem with it, because of the extent that this person knows about the subject proves that the person is not "Bella" but a Chess programmer pretending to be Bella. It's not that people knowing more about Chess programing than I do is a problem for me, if it was, then I wouldn't be able to tolerate this place at all, but there's something incredibly annoying about the deceptive nature of the Chris/Bella character now, so letting Chris back in as Chris(?) _now_ I'm starting to have a problem with that, and I'm not talking about the contributions that Chris could obviouslly make, I'm talking about the person making the contributions. So _that's_ a real bad attitude on my part, but am I alone in that? Probably not! Pete
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.