Rolf wrote:rjand wrote:
Hi Bob, Thats the impression I've been given but I may be "ignoring the campaign aspect"
Rick Andrews
Perhaps the following could be useful for beginners, of course I dont mean you, Rick.
Long time ago we had a member called Bruce Moreland, American and author of a (almost) Wch program FERRET. You could count on his messages containing high-level stuff apart from mainstream. With his talents he would have given a good scientist who wouldnt just following positivistic and limited perspectives.
He once stated in disbelief that forum debates wouldnt live out of the best thought messages, because that wouldnt get feedback or much less than clear agit-prop as it's called here in Europe.
In turning this around I make the following theory. If an expert, a scientist, relies on campaigns and its output, or if he is even one of the main allegators, then he cant be right and doing correctly his expected job as a scientist.
In special if that scientist has output of the following style:
- he gives correct statements
- he makes wild guesses in to him alien fields without own expertise
- he participates in either attacking another programmer
- or he also states that the actual stuff doesnt justify a condemnation
It is easy to see that with such itself contradicting messages there are some which also contain something true. And if you forget about all the other messages you could believe such an expert. But as a psychologist and methodologist of science I am familiar with analyses that always consider many factors and aspects, so that I can judge if for a particular situation such contrasting messages could seriously be made or if logically two messages would each exclude the other one.
I have got the impression that this is exactly what has happened in the campaign here. In the moment the majority of members didnt believe in the pre-judice against Vas the existence of a campaign itself was denied. But such a forum has the ideal nature of collecting all the former messages which contradict such biased conclusions. And I pretend that I can prove beyond a serious doubt that up to the speech and vocabulary the insinuation has been made that Vas practically is guilty if he doesnt come quickly to defend himself and proves that his code is sober, of course by a public opening of his code.
Bob made the legendary statement: this is not a campaign, I am just interested in the truth and I weant to know how Vas did it that his Rybka is so much stronger than all others. Bob however did never ask such questions to Fritz, Junior or Shredder, when they had the leading position. Now if that doesnt smell fishy? Fishy? Bob would say, it's Rybka the fish itself which has his smell everywhere and with that Bob doesnt make a false statement at all.
