That's pretty funny how they tricked us into thinking they were morons!Jouni wrote:This was good joke, when some "experts" here fell for it!
Don
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
That's pretty funny how they tricked us into thinking they were morons!Jouni wrote:This was good joke, when some "experts" here fell for it!
You said it is an april fool joke and we said "no it seems to be true", after that 4 hours are gone and you said "look at the PGN with April 1st" header. I have seen other evidences in rybakchess by that time. That is all I am saying. You may have known it was a joke without reading the publication but I urged everyone to read itI didn't see it till you posted it. I was the first in the thread to reply. I rarely look at Chessbase anymore. Probably that article to attack the ICGA was the final straw.
I still don't see what you're talking about. His first post is 12 minutes after you started the thread.Daniel Shawul wrote:Look the headers since our replies to him that it is real NOT his first post. 12:34 - 3:30Where do you get 4 hours? My post headers say 12 minutes.
Time starts from there and ends on the first evidence Referee. The PGN tag was his input ofcourse.
No, he said he hadn't seen it until you posted it. The 12 minutes between your first post and his fits perfectly with his statement that he gave it a quick resd.Daniel Shawul wrote:Even he said he didnt see the chessbase article
My post is nonsense? Why?Daniel Shawul wrote:your post is nonsense.
By what time?Daniel Shawul wrote:Many things have been talked about by that time.
Hmm, it appears you don't understand the phrase "I didn't see it till you posted it." That could explain things.Daniel Shawul wrote:Haha now you buy that after saying thisYou said it is an april fool joke and we said "no it seems to be true", after that 4 hours are gone and you said "look at the PGN with April 1st" header. I have seen other evidences in rybakchess by that time. That is all I am saying. You may have known it was a joke without reading the publication but I urged everyone to read itI didn't see it till you posted it. I was the first in the thread to reply. I rarely look at Chessbase anymore. Probably that article to attack the ICGA was the final straw.
Depends whereabouts in the world you are as to the date.playjunior wrote:There are 2 things about this article that make it lame. First, it was posted on April 2nd. Second, Chessbase uses Fischer's name in almost every April fools article.
Still, will be fun to read the readers' feedback
Hmm, maybe be your dumb that explains things. Seriously I don't know how to explain it any other than what I did above but I will once more:Dan Honeycutt wrote:Hmm, it appears you don't understand the phrase "I didn't see it till you posted it." That could explain things.Daniel Shawul wrote:Haha now you buy that after saying thisYou said it is an april fool joke and we said "no it seems to be true", after that 4 hours are gone and you said "look at the PGN with April 1st" header. I have seen other evidences in rybakchess by that time. That is all I am saying. You may have known it was a joke without reading the publication but I urged everyone to read itI didn't see it till you posted it. I was the first in the thread to reply. I rarely look at Chessbase anymore. Probably that article to attack the ICGA was the final straw.
Best
Dan H.
My, my you're rather touchy. He made a point, reiterated the same point later with additional data and you call him too late and me dumb.Daniel Shawul wrote:Hmm, maybe be your dumb that explains things. Seriously I don't know how to explain it any other than what I did above but I will once more:
a) I posted the chessbase link
b) He said aprils fools. ( you say we stop here after 12 minutes... )
c) Then the "challenge" to him comes
- Julien said it could be true sadly ( Later backed out )
- I gave an explanation as to why it would be true
d) Then somebody else said it is most probably a joke but a bad one
e) I said "read the publication before saying Bullshit" . Any Vas hater could say that without reading it.
f) Then finally after four hours the "April 1st PGN tag" is forwarded at which time it is too late.
Everyone was discussing in those 4 hours. If he knew why it was fake he should have said it right there and then when asked.
Anyway I was directly replying to his post from which you should have got the context before deciding to play referee.
yes later after 4 hours... after everything is settled in all other forums.My, my you're rather touchy. He made a point, reiterated the same point later with additional data and you call him too late and me dumb.
well you weren't in the discussion until it is over so ...Okay, whatever.