Forum's opinion about Norman Schmidt aka Kranium affair

[Dann Corbit]

I see, Dan, you behave strictly by the rules, no matter what. I wonder what would happens if we ever meet toguetjher as I am the opposite.
As the Lord said, the law if for the man, not the man for the Law...

Amen
Fern

I guess we would get along famously, and probably have a fun afternoon. But you never know.

[Don]

I see, Dan, you behave strictly by the rules, no matter what. I wonder what would happens if we ever meet toguetjher as I am the opposite.
As the Lord said, the law if for the man, not the man for the Law...

Amen
Fern

I know Dan personally, and he does not follow rules when there is a greater principle involved. That is just the opposite of what you are implying about his being a rigid slave to rules.

I admire the fact that he would treat each poster the same, without prejudice and I don't know what the alternative principle is that you would suggest. What you call rigid I call impartial.

As far as meeting up with Dan ... if this were to happen there would be no problem - you can be sure that he would treat you fairly and with respect and I think you would get along just fine because you are both nice people.

[Rolf]

I see, Dan, you behave strictly by the rules, no matter what. I wonder what would happens if we ever meet toguetjher as I am the opposite.
As the Lord said, the law if for the man, not the man for the Law...

Amen
Fern

I know Dan personally, and he does not follow rules when there is a greater principle involved. That is just the opposite of what you are implying about his being a rigid slave to rules.

I admire the fact that he would treat each poster the same, without prejudice and I don't know what the alternative principle is that you would suggest. What you call rigid I call impartial.

As far as meeting up with Dan ... if this were to happen there would be no problem - you can be sure that he would treat you fairly and with respect and I think you would get along just fine because you are both nice people.

Please take a look at the subforum where I have shown the contrary. Of impartial one really cant speak and I can also show that we have another aspect. IMO, just IMO, Dann had the following case where he exchanged email with Fabien (Fruit) and Fabien stated along Dann that he couldnt see anything wrong so far with the particular program, but Dann still didnt defend Rybka author Vas which is at least sub-optimal.

Somewhere else I showed how Vas should be defended even if doubt would remain but because the doubts cant have judicial relevance. IMO Dann doesnt suit the relatively easy to follow logical argument that if decidedly or must we say determined some people with doubt choose to NOT lose money in courtcase then it's called for that NOT in a mean campaigning the person is still being harrassed as if being guilty of some dubious allegation but all know that in a court case the evidence wouldnt be sufficient to reach a punishing verdict.

In such cases it's decent and ethically optimal to then treat the person in question as if innocent which means it's by no means allowed to repeatedly and constantly tear him through the mud. Because that wouldnt even happen if the guy would have been convicted in a legal court case.

Just a last question from a foreigner. IMO it's questionable to deal with a person who calls himself Dann with two 'n'. I cant imagine of what real name that is derived. So, fine that you know him in personal but I would want to know someone too who speaks in a personally deregatory manner about another member. Again see in Forum Suggestions and Help here in CCC.

So that I can only confirm that I am siding with Fern who at least here in this case seems to have the superior and better argument. Saying that if you dont have undoutable proof you should treat everybody as if innocent, no matter what you personally or in private or as a member of a group of experts or as another programmer (like Dann) know in details. Because that should remain irrelevant. But if you act based upon such knowledge as if for you that would be speaking against someone but you still wouldnt take legal steps then you are intrigant and bigot but not honest. Nobody can excuse his own evil steps by a secret but privately known other evil of someone else, the evil steps you undertake remain your own evil - and this is what Fern is considering and he seems to have the decent look of a senior expert while others might also have experience but lack the ethical class. All this IMO of course.

[Olivier Deville]

One of the biggest cheaters ever. He tried to fool us more than once.

I won't miss him at all.

Olivier

[solis]

Did we forget: Gens una sumus.

[Rolf]

Yes, and in chess we are always trying to fool each other, and more so on the net. So honestly I dont see the specifically personal aspect here. IMO we should never categorize others in personal since a) we are ourselves often enough guilty and b) we just dont know people enough well on the net. Of course the same applies to Norman in his focus on Vas and therefore I would ask him to forget his obsession (g).

[Olivier Deville]

Actually I don't care much Norman Schmidt being banned or not from CCC. He is not banned from the Winboard Forum, let's see if he has the gutts to post more lies there

One thing is certain : I won't test any more engine from him until my death.

Olivier

[slobo]

Yes, and in chess we are always trying to fool each other, and more so on the net. So honestly I dont see the specifically personal aspect here. IMO we should never categorize others in personal since a) we are ourselves often enough guilty and b) we just dont know people enough well on the net. Of course the same applies to Norman in his focus on Vas and therefore I would ask him to forget his obsession (g).

Why should he forget his obsession?
Perhaps we are not talking about the same thing?
I am talking about his onsession to make a strong engine. That was Vasic´s obsession too. And both of them started the same way: by using other author´s programs as model.

The diference between the two is that Vasic had been noiseless and patient, Norman noisy and impatient.

The only Norman´s fault is lieing. We should help him to overcom this weak point of his; we should explain to him that it is better to remain silent than to talk too much.

Slobo

[Rolf]

Yes, and in chess we are always trying to fool each other, and more so on the net. So honestly I dont see the specifically personal aspect here. IMO we should never categorize others in personal since a) we are ourselves often enough guilty and b) we just dont know people enough well on the net. Of course the same applies to Norman in his focus on Vas and therefore I would ask him to forget his obsession (g).

Why should he forget his obsession?
Perhaps we are not talking about the same thing?
I am talking about his onsession to make a strong engine. That was Vasic´s obsession too. And both of them started the same way: by using other author´s programs as model.

The diference between the two is that Vasic had been noiseless and patient, Norman noisy and impatient.

The only Norman´s fault is lieing. We should help him to overcom this weak point of his; we should explain to him that it is better to remain silent than to talk too much.

Slobo

Slobo, please excuse me but you leave out that Norm did all this to harm another programmer by usingan in his eyes similar method but what I wouldn accept as correct since Vas didnt do what Norm did which is simply proven by the fact that Fabien did NOT condemn the attempts of Vas, dont forget that fact. If you were correct with your theory that he just wanted to create a strong engine no matter how but certainly not to harm Vas, then you were right of course.

Slobo, I take you as academic and I want to ask you if this isnt very easy to understand that we have here the almost inacceptable method where someone who is unhappy with the behavior of someone else - who isnt condemned by the community nor by a verdict in a legal case. And now he is trying to blackmail the community in the following again insane manner: he creates cloness and when being caught he says but why are you criticising me, nobody has done so against Vas. So, please, he continues in his obsession, please do something against Vas and then I will imediately stop to create new clones. I see this as a completely outlandish method that cannot be tolerated. The more so, see Olivier, he has deceived so many others in the community, just because he wanted to chase Vas. See also my message to Don Bailey. There I elaborated on the responsability of someone who uses evil strategies just to make public the alleged evil behavior of someone else, but who isnt sued at all. Know what I mean?

[slobo]

Yes, and in chess we are always trying to fool each other, and more so on the net. So honestly I dont see the specifically personal aspect here. IMO we should never categorize others in personal since a) we are ourselves often enough guilty and b) we just dont know people enough well on the net. Of course the same applies to Norman in his focus on Vas and therefore I would ask him to forget his obsession (g).

Why should he forget his obsession?
Perhaps we are not talking about the same thing?
I am talking about his onsession to make a strong engine. That was Vasic´s obsession too. And both of them started the same way: by using other author´s programs as model.

The diference between the two is that Vasic had been noiseless and patient, Norman noisy and impatient.

The only Norman´s fault is lieing. We should help him to overcom this weak point of his; we should explain to him that it is better to remain silent than to talk too much.

Slobo

Slobo, please excuse me but you leave out that Norm did all this to harm another programmer by usingan in his eyes similar method but what I wouldn accept as correct since Vas didnt do what Norm did which is simply proven by the fact that Fabien did NOT condemn the attempts of Vas, dont forget that fact. If you were correct with your theory that he just wanted to create a strong engine no matter how but certainly not to harm Vas, then you were right of course.

Slobo, I take you as academic and I want to ask you if this isnt very easy to understand that we have here the almost inacceptable method where someone who is unhappy with the behavior of someone else - who isnt condemned by the community nor by a verdict in a legal case. And now he is trying to blackmail the community in the following again insane manner: he creates cloness and when being caught he says but why are you criticising me, nobody has done so against Vas. So, please, he continues in his obsession, please do something against Vas and then I will imediately stop to create new clones. I see this as a completely outlandish method that cannot be tolerated. The more so, see Olivier, he has deceived so many others in the community, just because he wanted to chase Vas. See also my message to Don Bailey. There I elaborated on the responsability of someone who uses evil strategies just to make public the alleged evil behavior of someone else, but who isnt sued at all. Know what I mean?

I think, Rolf, that your reading of Norman´s behaviour is not accurate. I think you are obsessed by defending Vasic so much that you see Norman´s behaviour as an example of attacking Vasik. It is not the correct reading.
Norman is not "unhappy with the behavior of someone else", as said. He is unhappy with himself, and that´s why we should help him; you in the first place, as a psychologist. And he deserves our help and patience because, as I said, he is a talented guy who likes computer chess.