Author: jonathon smith
Date: 07:51:23 02/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 06, 2000 at 10:36:31, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On February 06, 2000 at 10:04:11, jonathon smith wrote: > >>On February 06, 2000 at 09:55:06, Ed Schröder wrote: >> >>>On February 06, 2000 at 09:23:51, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On February 06, 2000 at 01:21:23, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 05, 2000 at 23:26:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 05, 2000 at 21:06:15, Peter Kasinski wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>I think that Bob made an unfortunate oversight by not straightening this >>>>>>>"censor" business in time for the tournament (i.e. he was late days not >>>>>>>minutes). >>>>>> >>>>>>There I disagree. The "censor" was for a purpose. The "reason" didn't >>>>>>disappear "days before the tournament". The "censor" will stand _after_ >>>>>>the tournament. I don't take accusations of misconduct lightly, now, back >>>>>>three months ago, nor will I take them lightly in the future. >>>>> >>>>>>I don't censor to disrupt a tournament. >>>>> >>>>>You managed anyway. The censor was there while it should have not. >>>>> >>>>>Ed >>>> >>>>A. A censor list is _mine_ to control, _not_ yours. I censor when/who I >>>>choose, and that is my decision, not yours. The censor was removed _prior_ >>>>to the start of the round, at least 10 minutes prior to in fact. _I_ didn't >>>>disrupt the event. >>>> >>>>B. I don't see what your one-liner offers to the discussion, either. >>> >>>I don't like people being lynched. When this occurs I tend to point out >>>the "+" points of the lynched party as nothing happens for no reason. In >>>case you don't understand my point, I will do the very same in case the >>>opposite will happen to you. It just ain't right, double period. >>> >>>Ed >>> >> >>ChrisW told me that this comment is hypocritical. Mr Schroder has engaged in a >>ex-legal lynching himself in the case of ChrisW who was 'lynched' from the CCC >>even though he had not posted into the CCC for five months. > >Wrong. When moderators, or in your case the founders, give the red card to >someone and is banned from CCC, there is no lynching. Banners Endlessly Lying Loudly Afterwards, by Hyatt, Frickenschmidt and yourself was the "lynching". Or as Mr Moreland described it as a "Kafkaesque Torture". Further your contract with ICD compromised your position. You cannot claim to have been acting with pure motives. Hence the hypocracy. The lynching was and is >done by you and some others on RGCC. We replied once as a group on CCC. The >lynching done by you took place months before and years after. It is your >regurgitations on the matter what is hypocritical. > >People are talking about what happened yesterday. Your usual ME ME ME is also >hypocritical. > >Enrique > >PS. I don't bother answering to split personalities when they pick on me, but >don't count on it when it happens to others. > >>>>>>I censor to show that I strongly disagree >>>>>>with the person that made the accusation. I think it funny that _I_ was >>>>>>wrong for censoring him, but he doesn't think he was wrong when he made >>>>>>about the most idiotic statement ever made here (and directed toward me.) >>>>>> >>>>>>After witnessing today's claims/counter-claims/etc, I only wish we had a >>>>>>'+censor' option for CCC. I would exercise _that_ as well. :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> And that?s regardless of its genesis. I understand how Amir must have >>>>>>>felt. Unfortunately, for all his contribution to computer chess (who else is >>>>>>>there? ) Bob isn?t exactly a sweetheart at times. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>But what?s really disturbing is a bunch of postings here from adolescent would >>>>>>>be moderators trying to give either one of them lessons in good manners. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>PK
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.