Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Moderation: Why do people pick on Chris W?

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 12:09:03 01/27/00

Go up one level in this thread


Chris W. has informed Johnathon well and accurately that he is picked on.
Anyone who denies this is living with their head in the sand.  I see it.  You
see it.  We all see it.  So the question is "Why?"  Why do people pick on Chris?
 There seems to be no shortage of bodies to pick on.  Why aren't they singled
out instead of Chris?  I have *personally* picked on Chris.  I admit my guilt,
and state further that it does not really accomplish anything useful.

Q:
Is it professional jealousy?

It seems that many of those who pick on Chris are very successful chess
programmers.  At least as successful as Chris, if not more so.  There are other
chess programmers who are successful and yet they don't get picked on.  It seems
to me that (at least for most posters) it is not professional jealousy.

Q:
Is it that we are unable to refute his brilliant arguements?

There can be no denying that Chris is very intelligent -- far above average.  He
is effective in making his points although he sometimes uses ridicule (but don't
we all?)  I am neither a chess nor programming genius, but I see arguments on
both sides as being about equal.  The intelligent searchers seem to do about as
well as the fast searchers.  We can also argue from the standpoint of art -- but
art is very personal.  One man likes Botticelli's "Birth of Venus" and another
likes Rembrandt's "Sunflowers" best.  Which is better?  There is no answer
except on a personal level.  It seems to me that (at least for most posters) it
is not his brilliant arguements.

What it boils down to (in my view) is his personal attacks and the company he
keeps.  Now, all of us *do* make personal attacks -- let's be honest.  The
problem is that Chris is so darn *good* at it.  His sarcasm is biting.  His
derision can be positively monumental.  He does not attack people a lot.  But
when he does, it is always a real stinger.  Eventually either one of our friends
or even ourselves feel the brunt of it.  At that point, Chris generally gets put
on the mental "dookie" list.  If this tendency could be curbed (or even if he
could change them to lame, ineffective personal attacks like the ones that _we_
do), I think everyone would be much more receptive to CW.  Because Chris has
been much of an outcast, he has tended to associate himself with other outcasts
(I once made a comment about his "strange bedfellows" over on r.g.c.c).  Those
[nameless but well-known] outcasts are (similarly) outcast for some reason.  I
think (also) that we probably blame Chris more than the other outcasts because
he has the mental tools to overcome any such difficulty.  Some of the others
seem genuinely dull-witted and were not gifted with the same abilities.

Now, in the case of his company, I think (quite frankly) it's none of our
business.  He may like someone that I consider a whinging twit, but I am sure
that the reciprocal occurs also (in fact, he may consider *me* to be a whinging
twit -- as I certainly am at times).  So what are we left with?

Jumping down people's throats with both boots on, kicking as he goes.  Maybe if
he at least took the boots off, we could accept him with open arms.  He has the
full capability to make exactly the same points but without injuring the
feelings of others.



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.