Moderator: Ras
Not really Christophe. Asking questions is okay if done in the right manner. Seems to me though that these are more like accusations being made which is more than just asking questions.tiger wrote:Zach has Graham's blessing now.
// Christophe
If Zach and his comrades prove to be correct in their accusations, I'll be one of the first to eat humble pie. I'm used to doing it, so it shouldn't be too hard!SzG wrote:Zach, at the age of 20 you are not entitled to be wrong. That is for us in our 50's...Zach Wegner wrote:Graham,Graham Banks wrote:Tell me Zach - what will you do if you're proven to be wrong?
You guys have caused such a stink over this issue, that your names would likely be tarnished in the computer chess scene forever. It would be difficult for anybody to take any of you seriously ever again.
What exactly have I done? I have asked perfectly reasonable questions. I never claimed to be absolutely sure of anything. If I am proven to be wrong, then I will simply admit that I was wrong. I am not an egomaniac, and I am not afraid of being incorrect. What's so hard to understand about this issue? There is a tendency in this community to inflate simple matters into community-wide commotions. It has happened before countless times over post editing, aliases, mod impeachment, etc. etc. _et cetera_. Some people here seem to have a hard time distinguishing the signal from the noise. I have been completely forthcoming about my motives and goals, so as far as I am concerned, you are just trying to stir up conflict.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would not "take me seriously" because of the discussions in the past week or so (are these perhaps the feelings that you are having now?). If they do, that's their decision and I could care less. I am in computer chess because I like it, and any conversations I have in this forum are because I want to. My contributions to the community speak for themselves, but there will always be those who need to put age or envy or some such nonsense into the equation. You and your colleagues are welcome to not take me seriously anymore, a decision that George has already appeared to make.
Graham Banks wrote:If Zach and his comrades prove to be correct in their accusations, I'll be one of the first to eat humble pie. I'm used to doing it, so it shouldn't be too hard!SzG wrote:Zach, at the age of 20 you are not entitled to be wrong. That is for us in our 50's...Zach Wegner wrote:Graham,Graham Banks wrote:Tell me Zach - what will you do if you're proven to be wrong?
You guys have caused such a stink over this issue, that your names would likely be tarnished in the computer chess scene forever. It would be difficult for anybody to take any of you seriously ever again.
What exactly have I done? I have asked perfectly reasonable questions. I never claimed to be absolutely sure of anything. If I am proven to be wrong, then I will simply admit that I was wrong. I am not an egomaniac, and I am not afraid of being incorrect. What's so hard to understand about this issue? There is a tendency in this community to inflate simple matters into community-wide commotions. It has happened before countless times over post editing, aliases, mod impeachment, etc. etc. _et cetera_. Some people here seem to have a hard time distinguishing the signal from the noise. I have been completely forthcoming about my motives and goals, so as far as I am concerned, you are just trying to stir up conflict.
I find it hard to believe that anyone would not "take me seriously" because of the discussions in the past week or so (are these perhaps the feelings that you are having now?). If they do, that's their decision and I could care less. I am in computer chess because I like it, and any conversations I have in this forum are because I want to. My contributions to the community speak for themselves, but there will always be those who need to put age or envy or some such nonsense into the equation. You and your colleagues are welcome to not take me seriously anymore, a decision that George has already appeared to make.
My main annoyance is that this seems to be more than just "asking questions". It seems more like accusations being made with so called "proof" served up on a platter.
He is doing what he believes to be the right thing. Some agree, some disagree. However threats of tarnished image do not help and its an empty threat anyway.Graham Banks wrote:Tell me Zach - what will you do if you're proven to be wrong?Zach Wegner wrote:George,
If nobody bothers to give your post a serious response, please don't misinterpret that.
It is, as you say in your language, "bullshit".
You guys have caused such a stink over this issue, that your names would likely be tarnished in the computer chess scene forever. It would be difficult for anybody to take any of you seriously ever again.
yeah, kinda like a 'credibility' slugfest, best man left standing. Vas could bring L. Kaufman, or another for the tag-team competition.geots wrote:Instead of using this forum to pitch your arguments, a forum you know Vas never hardly reads much less will appear on. I have a suggestion to Christophe, Zach, Bob Hyatt and any others. Vas will meet you anytime- any place- anywhere- ONE ON ONE. Then lets see how things turn. Zach has to his credit approached Vas on the Rybka forum with, i think, 5 points- and after a few sentences from Vas has already had to concede one of them. So Bob- here is the deal- meet Vas one on one, and let us see, concerning the Rybka issue, who has any credibility left after all is said and done- and who will leave with his head hung in shame. I already know. Vas is waiting, Bob- the ball is in your court. Very easy to be critical when you are playing to deaf ears. Let us see how you fare one on one against him. Personally, i cant wait. Tho i know it will never happen- not now- not ever.
What age has to has someone to be "critical" to you?geots wrote:Zach Wegner wrote:George,
If nobody bothers to give your post a serious response, please don't misinterpret that.
It is, as you say in your language, "bullshit".
I refuse to be critical of a 20 year old. You will grow up in time.
Best,
Graham, that what you're doing is an attack on Zach and others. They simply are looking for truth, why for god sake have they be tarnished or some???Graham Banks wrote:Tell me Zach - what will you do if you're proven to be wrong?Zach Wegner wrote:George,
If nobody bothers to give your post a serious response, please don't misinterpret that.
It is, as you say in your language, "bullshit".
You guys have caused such a stink over this issue, that your names would likely be tarnished in the computer chess scene forever. It would be difficult for anybody to take any of you seriously ever again.
Not an attack Geno. Just letting them know that there could be consequences if their very serious accusations are wrong.GenoM wrote:Graham, that what you're doing is an attack on Zach and others. They simply are looking for truth, why for god sake have they be tarnished or some???Graham Banks wrote:Tell me Zach - what will you do if you're proven to be wrong?Zach Wegner wrote:George,
If nobody bothers to give your post a serious response, please don't misinterpret that.
It is, as you say in your language, "bullshit".
You guys have caused such a stink over this issue, that your names would likely be tarnished in the computer chess scene forever. It would be difficult for anybody to take any of you seriously ever again.
And you, if still a mod would remove this investigation, for the best interests of the community, correct?Graham Banks wrote:Not an attack Geno. Just letting them know that there could be consequences if their very serious accusations are wrong.GenoM wrote:Graham, that what you're doing is an attack on Zach and others. They simply are looking for truth, why for god sake have they be tarnished or some???Graham Banks wrote:Tell me Zach - what will you do if you're proven to be wrong?Zach Wegner wrote:George,
If nobody bothers to give your post a serious response, please don't misinterpret that.
It is, as you say in your language, "bullshit".
You guys have caused such a stink over this issue, that your names would likely be tarnished in the computer chess scene forever. It would be difficult for anybody to take any of you seriously ever again.
I don't think they're worried anyway though because they'd have thought that all through before jumping in boots and all.
Besides, if the moderators consider it an attack, I guess they'll remove it.
Regards, Graham.
A hypothetical question Terry.Terry McCracken wrote: And you, if still a mod would remove this investigation, correct?
