I don't know. Usually he is entertaining me, but I couldn't understand his latest babble, and was hoping for some explanation. He seemed to answer his own postings.
The mistake I am making is that I continue to get sucked into discussions with unreasonable people. In some sense this tends to validate their point of view by making it seem as if it's worthy of a vigorous debate. Since it's not, they get way more out of than I do.
I don't mind discussing any point of view if it's done with some respect. I cringe when I see some nobody (in computer chess that is) attacking Bob Hyatt for instance and I just think it's ridiculous to allow them to "sequester" us like this. We should likewise be able to talk to them with respect or not at all.
Ok, it sounds good on paper - let's see if I can really do it
I don't know. Usually he is entertaining me, but I couldn't understand his latest babble, and was hoping for some explanation. He seemed to answer his own postings.
The mistake I am making is that I continue to get sucked into discussions with unreasonable people. In some sense this tends to validate their point of view by making it seem as if it's worthy of a vigorous debate. Since it's not, they get way more out of than I do.
I don't mind discussing any point of view if it's done with some respect. I cringe when I see some nobody (in computer chess that is) attacking Bob Hyatt for instance and I just think it's ridiculous to allow them to "sequester" us like this. We should likewise be able to talk to them with respect or not at all.
Ok, it sounds good on paper - let's see if I can really do it
That is worth an IM norm in forum usage.
You'll know you are a GM when you are capable of simply not reading posts by posters you have no interest in. (it is not enough to not reply)
Ex: your reply was the first post in this thread I read (and only one I will have read).
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
