final post
Andrew Gambier
<hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu> writes
>After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
>the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'.
(snip rest about how there'll be one more post and that's it)
There are some here to which this will be a further nail in the coffin.
I'm trying to write a chess program (from scratch, not a bastardized
version of somebody else's...) And I've found some of the advice here
pretty helpful. But as more and more people bow out, it's going to
become more difficult to get any sensible suggestions.
So... is there a mailing list we can turn to? (I'd rather avoid things
web-based if at all possible).
--
andrew
gto
I will remove the link to rec.games.chess.computer from my system. Without
you, it makes no sense to listen to these news.
Really sad, but I can completely understand your point after so much unfair
provocation.
May your Crafty project prosper.
GTO
Robert Hyatt wrote in message <7dcc8u$435$1...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>...
>After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
>the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'. What
.....
Robert Hyatt
the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'. What
much time I spend defending myself (or others that no longer post
here because they tired of having to defend themselves and wisely
left), there is no way to ultimately win this battle. DB will
forever be called a 'cheat' by Rolf. People will forever be in-
sulted by Sean. And 'Zarathustra' and his alter-egos seem to be
intent on following me so long as I continue to post here. The
"Sam Sloan conspiracy theory" will be rehashed every time someone
thinks it will damage my (or other members of the CB team) repu-
tation. IE this is not ever going to stop, unless this newsgroup
becomes moderated to stop the 'problems'. We watched Ken Thomp-
son, Dave Slate, all the way through Ed Schroeder, leave rather
than put up with the continuous insults and personal attacks. We
suffered thru Fong driving Schaeffer off. Then TheDoDo. We even
almost survived the room full of monkeys with a word processor
that posts under the pseudonym "Rolf". But this should be fun.
And it is not. And for me, it is time to 'stop'. I suppose it
is remarkable that I managed to survive here for > 10 years, now
that I think about it. That must be some sort of record that
might be harder to break than the 70 home runs hit last year. :)
Zarathustra claimed he 'wanted to save this newsgroup.' Yet he
has become more of a problem than the ones that came before him
(if indeed he is not another alter-ego for TheDoDo or whatever).
He contributes nothing. He only wants to 'stalk' and I seem to
be his target. However, this target is going to drop off the
radar.
I plan for this to be my next-to-final post here. I believe that
if I disappear (to CCC and the Crafty mailing list) part of the
'reason' for his garbage in this newsgroup will go away. I am
also going to discontinue the ftp site for Crafty source and exe-
cutables. I will continue providing Eugene's tablebase files and
the 'plytest' data that the JICCA article Monty and I wrote men-
tions, but no more crafty distributions will take place via
anonymous ftp. If you are a crafty user, or are interested in
becoming one, feel free to contact me via email, via CCC, or via
the crafty mailing list. I'm not deserting everyone that is us-
ing it. But I am going to make it impossible for someone to ex-
ploit what I have worked so hard to create. This time there will
be a legitimate licensing facility (no charge) but it will re-
quire a real email where I can choose to send a copy or refuse if
I suspect something odd going on. If you are interested, don't
give up.
I say this will be my 'next-to-final' post, because I do plan one
more post in a few weeks. Once certain events have been handled
here, I do plan on one more post to supply the real name, ad-
dress, and phone number of our 'anonymous stalker'. Since I
don't believe anyone should be allowed to run over our newsgroup
freely. Of course, anyone can do the necessary 'detective work'
on their own, if interested.
I really dislike 'giving up' but it is apparent there is no win-
ning here. I guess I now understand why all the 'old hands' left
one by one. The bad thing is that as the Internet grows, you are
going to see more and more 'Zarathustras' here, because the more
apples you get, the more bad apples you get. And in this case,
one apple can definitely spoil the barrel.
Feel free to continue to ask questions via email, but understand
that I am one person, and although I answer every email personal-
ly, it takes some time and effort.
99.9% of the folks here have been enjoyable to chat with, argue
with, or compromise with. I certainly apologize for being a
'lightning rod' and providing a ready target for our 'stalkers';
and for sometimes allowing myself to be provoked to the point of
using language I don't normally use. However, after getting pro-
voked _so many_ times, I hope most at least understand 'why'.
The down side is that as more of 'us' leave, all that will be
left is 'them'. Not a pretty sight. And perhaps this is clear
evidence that we do need a moderated forum like CCC to prevent
this kind of nonsense.
Note that you can always find me at hy...@cis.uab.edu, or at
www.icdchess.com/ccc/ where the 'stalkers' are not welcome and
not allowed. If you'd like to see a less 'noisy' discussion area
(although web-based which I don't like as well as usenet news)
feel free to join 'us' there. And if there is an interest in
(finally) turning this into a moderated newsgroup, I'm always
willing to help, as that would be one way to 'take
rec.games.chess.computer' "back" from the 'problems'. IE can you
imagine a r.g.c.c without Rolf, Sean or "Z"? Is that 'image'
good enough to start the process? Because we know where apathy
leads. To a newsgroup overrun with people only interested in
posting nonsense personal attacks, and _nothing_ else.
We know because we are _there_ almost. There will continue to be
good posters here, Until they become targets. And the cycle
continues, and the number of good posters dwindles.
In any case, I am now returning to what I should have been doing
more of, namely trying to make Crafty better, rather than trying
to make this newsgroup more informative.
respectfully yours,
Bob Hyatt
james....@yale.edu
wrote:
>I say this will be my 'next-to-final' post, because I do plan one
>more post in a few weeks. Once certain events have been handled
>here, I do plan on one more post to supply the real name, ad-
>dress, and phone number of our 'anonymous stalker'. Since I
>don't believe anyone should be allowed to run over our newsgroup
>freely. Of course, anyone can do the necessary 'detective work'
>on their own, if interested.
Don't forget place of work. He likes to post from there.
C. L. Williams
>In any case, I am now returning to what I should have been doing
>more of, namely trying to make Crafty better, rather than trying
>to make this newsgroup more informative.
>respectfully yours,
>Bob Hyatt
I don't know what to say, Bob. I don't think I could have gotten my
program to run without your posts, either in response to my questions,
or researched through Dejanews. At least not within a four month
period. See you in CCC.
Chuck
UltraB
others had to use filters to the point where it became pointless when they
reply and responses are posted including the rubbish they write.
I will also join CCC that way at least I will get to see your helpful
replies to peoples questions. Especially my own.
Good luck to you. Dr.
UltraB.
Adnan
On 25 Mar 1999 03:58:22 GMT, in rec.games.chess.computer Robert Hyatt wrote:
>I plan for this to be my next-to-final post here. I believe that
>if I disappear (to CCC and the Crafty mailing list) part of the
>'reason' for his garbage in this newsgroup will go away. I am
>also going to discontinue the ftp site for Crafty source and exe-
>cutables. I will continue providing Eugene's tablebase files and
>the 'plytest' data that the JICCA article Monty and I wrote men-
>tions, but no more crafty distributions will take place via
>anonymous ftp.
>I really dislike 'giving up' but it is apparent there is no win-
>ning here. I guess I now understand why all the 'old hands' left
>one by one. The bad thing is that as the Internet grows, you are
>going to see more and more 'Zarathustras' here, because the more
>apples you get, the more bad apples you get. And in this case,
>one apple can definitely spoil the barrel.
I suggest a new moderated group called: rec.games.chess.computer.moderated.
If that is not possible, I think you can get enough votes for at least
rec.games.chess.moderated. Where computer chess and other chess topics
would be allowed. This way we will have one moderated and other unmoderated
groups for those who prefer unmoderated groups.
Anyone wants to take this cause?
Steffen A. Jakob
nothing will change. But some guys have to get a life now.
Best wishes,
Steffen.
--
Steffen A. Jakob | "Victory goes to the player who makes the
ste...@jakob.at | second-to-last mistake."
http://www.jakob.at/ | (Savielly Grigorievitch Tartakower)
RDavis101
be an enjoyable vacation. Everyone else has gone to bed, but I wanted to stay
up to read rec.games.chess.computer, only to find out that it's losing its CORE
PERSON. What a bummer for everyone on this group. I'd ask you to reconsider,
Bob, but I completely understand. As far as I am concerned, this group has lost
its reason for being.
I look forward to reading your messages at www.icdchess.com. I hope everyone on
this group who wants to participate in the intelligent discussion of computer
chess will join there.
Roger
Vitaly Livshits
helpful.
--
Vitaly Livshits
vit...@nospam.poboxes.com
Andrew Gambier <nai...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
news:PToH6DA+...@panix.com...
> In article <7dcc8u$435$1...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>, Robert Hyatt
> <hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu> writes
> >After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
> >the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'.
>
Peter Kappler
Bob,
A few years ago, when I first started to write my program, I remember
being amazed that the author of Cray Blitz would take the time to
answer my silly novice questions about chess programming.
Since then I've made countless visits to dejanews, and typed "Hyatt
nullmove" or "Hyatt bitboards", knowing that I would find the answer
to my question.
Thanks for all the great posts. See you at CCC.
--Peter
Jeff Hamm
posted this as a new thread rather than as a reply! Ooops!
- Jeff
Hi,
Sorry to see you go. I've been reading this news group, with only the
occasional question, and I understand why you might have had enough of
"the problem children".
Wish you had not been driven to your choice. I've found that
filtering out Rolf, Sean, any post with Hiattian, Drafty (though I can
understand why you would have to montior that due to the copywrite
issue), and a few other simple selections really improved the "air
quality".
It's a shame, really, that those who know so little have chosen to
torment one who might actually be able to teach them something rather
than to learn.
- Jeff
Robert Sullivan
I'm going to delete this group from my browser, since Bob is just too much
of what brings me here. I'm going to CCC. Bob, if you should ever decide to
return here, please post that good news to CCC. Thanks. For everything.
Best regards,
Robert Sullivan, MD
bob4...@earthlink.net
"Can the battlefield offer anything I can win?"
(from "A Course In Miracles")
David Rasmussen
>
Fuck. That it really sad.
Thanks a lot, you anti-Hyatt people! You've really done the world a lot
of good! (not!)
Do You feel better now?
--
David Rasmussen
"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be." Roger
Waters
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." John
Lennon
Floyd Code: v1.2a r+d>s TW 1/0/pw tG sqrt(-1)? 0 DSotM 3 2 <6jun98>
Andreas Schwartmann
A while ago, I have created an english language mailing list for computer chess
lovers. It has 45 subscribers yet, so everyone who is not pleased with r.g.c.c.
is welcomed to subscribe to this list. This list is not actually moderated, but
personal attacks and insults are not tolerated and result in immediate sign-off
of the attacking poster.
The subscription address is: http://www.onelist.com/subscribe/computerchess
Andreas
--
schwa...@netcologne.de
ICQ # 27170739
Visit my homepage "Andi's Playground": http://www.netcologne.de/~nc-schwaran2/
"The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed." -
Stephen King, The Gunslinger
Sean
news:7dcc8u$435$1...@juniper.cis.uab.edu...
> After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
> the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'.
No Dr. Bobo we beat you and now you have to climb back over the wire with
your Voodoo troll dolls.
>What
> that means, simply, is that I finally realized that no matter how
> much time I spend defending myself (or others that no longer post
> here because they tired of having to defend themselves and wisely
> left), there is no way to ultimately win this battle. DB will
> forever be called a 'cheat' by Rolf. People will forever be in-
> sulted by Sean.
People insult me such as you as was proven with Hyatt Watch...you are
leaving because Hyatt Watch proved; using you're own words that you are a
troll doll and nothing more...I am surmizing the UAB told you to stop
posting here at rgcc or risk being fired from you're job due to disgraceful
behaviour !
>And 'Zarathustra' and his alter-egos seem to be
> intent on following me so long as I continue to post here.
You were beaten by the facts and the truth Bob, nothing more !
>The
> "Sam Sloan conspiracy theory" will be rehashed every time someone
> thinks it will damage my (or other members of the CB team) repu-
> tation. IE this is not ever going to stop, unless this newsgroup
> becomes moderated to stop the 'problems'. We watched Ken Thomp-
> son, Dave Slate, all the way through Ed Schroeder, leave rather
> than put up with the continuous insults and personal attacks. We
> suffered thru Fong driving Schaeffer off. Then TheDoDo. We even
> almost survived the room full of monkeys with a word processor
> that posts under the pseudonym "Rolf". But this should be fun.
> And it is not. And for me, it is time to 'stop'. I suppose it
> is remarkable that I managed to survive here for > 10 years, now
> that I think about it. That must be some sort of record that
> might be harder to break than the 70 home runs hit last year. :)
If people cannot defend themselves in the public domain it is their fault
and nothing more !
> Zarathustra claimed he 'wanted to save this newsgroup.' Yet he
> has become more of a problem than the ones that came before him
> (if indeed he is not another alter-ego for TheDoDo or whatever).
> He contributes nothing. He only wants to 'stalk' and I seem to
> be his target. However, this target is going to drop off the
> radar.
Nobody is stalking anybody...Dr. Bobo stated in the public domain that he
never said certain things, yet the Hyatt Watch web site proved he had; now
Dr. Bobo is mad because he has been proven a liar and a troll....good bye !
> I plan for this to be my next-to-final post here. I believe that
> if I disappear (to CCC and the Crafty mailing list) part of the
> 'reason' for his garbage in this newsgroup will go away.
Yes when you leave Bob a big rgcc problem will leave as well ! YOU !
>I am
> also going to discontinue the ftp site for Crafty source and exe-
> cutables
Stop there Dr. Bobo nobody wants you're crappy software that is why you are
giving it away Kasparov calls it a weak program ! What more can you say !
> I say this will be my 'next-to-final' post, because I do plan one
> more post in a few weeks. Once certain events have been handled
> here, I do plan on one more post to supply the real name, ad-
> dress, and phone number of our 'anonymous stalker'. Since I
> don't believe anyone should be allowed to run over our newsgroup
> freely. Of course, anyone can do the necessary 'detective work'
> on their own, if interested.
I already know who he is and I applaud his actions ! In real life this
person is a respectable man and is a good person, nothing wrong with that !
> I really dislike 'giving up' but it is apparent there is no win-
> ning here.
Finally the truth Dr. Bobo has lost "THEM" are retreating, "US" have won no
more Hyattian spam....aren't some causes worth fighting for !
>I guess I now understand why all the 'old hands' left
> one by one. The bad thing is that as the Internet grows, you are
> going to see more and more 'Zarathustras' here, because the more
> apples you get, the more bad apples you get. And in this case,
> one apple can definitely spoil the barrel.
Your the bad worm infested apple though Mr. Bobo so good-bye !
> Feel free to continue to ask questions via email, but understand
> that I am one person, and although I answer every email personal-
> ly, it takes some time and effort.
Don't worry we won't !
> 99.9% of the folks here have been enjoyable to chat with, argue
> with, or compromise with. I certainly apologize for being a
> 'lightning rod' and providing a ready target for our 'stalkers';
Translation:
Mr. Bobo who is a troll and a trouble maker has been beaten by the facts and
now he is leaving a beaten man....chow baby !
> and for sometimes allowing myself to be provoked to the point of
> using language I don't normally use.
Actually you use foul language quite often as Hyatt Watch proved !
>However, after getting pro-
> voked _so many_ times, I hope most at least understand 'why'.
Yes "US" understands that you have many character defects which is why we
would not stand for your crappola any longer !
> The down side is that as more of 'us' leave,
No No More of "THEM"
>all that will be
> left is 'them'.
No No More of "US" !
>Not a pretty sight.
Actually a beautiful sight !
>And perhaps this is clear
> evidence that we do need a moderated forum like CCC to prevent
> this kind of nonsense.
Run and hide with your friends behind the barb wire Dr. Bobo, with your evil
Death Ray Guns and Land mines....."US" shall prevail ....because we tell the
truth !
> Note that you can always find me at hy...@cis.uab.edu, or at
> www.icdchess.com/ccc/ where the 'stalkers' are not welcome and
> not allowed.
CCC where the people who are unable to defend themselves from the facts also
hide like Dr. Bobo !
>If you'd like to see a less 'noisy' discussion area
> (although web-based which I don't like as well as usenet news)
> feel free to join 'us' there. And if there is an interest in
> (finally) turning this into a moderated newsgroup, I'm always
> willing to help, as that would be one way to 'take
> rec.games.chess.computer' "back" from the 'problems'. IE can you
> imagine a r.g.c.c without Rolf, Sean or "Z"? Is that 'image'
> good enough to start the process? Because we know where apathy
> leads.
>To a newsgroup overrun with people only interested in
> posting nonsense personal attacks, and _nothing_ else.
Sounds like you Dr. Bobo now that you have left perhaps things will calm
down !
> We know because we are _there_ almost. There will continue to be
> good posters here, Until they become targets. And the cycle
> continues, and the number of good posters dwindles.
>
> In any case, I am now returning to what I should have been doing
> more of, namely trying to make Crafty better, rather than trying
> to make this newsgroup more informative.
It's about time...your program has fallen so far behind it is now
ridiculously poor "Relatively Speaking" as per Gary Kasparov !
> respectfully yours,
>
> Bob Hyatt
unrespectfully yours,
The Apostle Sean
Henri H. Arsenault
<bob4...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Sad news for this group, Bob. Meaning no offense to those who remain here,
> I'm going to delete this group from my browser, since Bob is just too much
> of what brings me here. I'm going to CCC. Bob, if you should ever decide to
> return here, please post that good news to CCC. Thanks. For everything.
> Best regards,
> Robert Sullivan, MD
> bob4...@earthlink.net
>
Yeah, but geez, these newsgroups are much too slow to read. What do we
have to do to get a moderated newsgroup?
After KK leaving and now Bob, this newsgroup is really taking a nosedive...
*sob*
Henri
Sean
news:36FA1C68...@kampsax.dtu.dk...
> Fuck. That it really sad.
I think you have been reading to many of Hyatt's posts he, you now swearing
like him and a banchee !
> Thanks a lot, you anti-Hyatt people!
Your welcome !
> You've really done the world a lot of good!
Thank you !
> Do You feel better now?
Yes I feel great...you have to understand that Hyatt brought this ALL onto
himself with his crap......now he has finally lost the War......chow bud !
The Apostle Sean
David Rasmussen
>
> David Rasmussen <ho...@kampsax.dtu.dk> wrote in message
> news:36FA1C68...@kampsax.dtu.dk...
>
> > Fuck. That it really sad.
>
> I think you have been reading to many of Hyatt's posts he, you now swearing
> like him and a banchee !
>
I've always been swearing you fucking moron.
> > Thanks a lot, you anti-Hyatt people!
>
> Your welcome !
>
> > You've really done the world a lot of good!
>
> Thank you !
>
> > Do You feel better now?
>
> Yes I feel great...you have to understand that Hyatt brought this ALL onto
> himself with his crap......now he has finally lost the War......chow bud !
His crap? What crap? What have YOU done to help anybody? You're just a
tiny man with a tiny brain.
Motherfucker.
John A. Perry
<vit...@nospam.poboxes.com> wrote:
>The owner of jpunix.com is running several mailing lists which you may find
>helpful.
I'd also like to point out that the majority of my mailing lists are
moderated. That means that if you want to bring the petty, insulting,
word-wars the my mailing lists you will be summarily ignored and
filtered out. Anyone that wants to discuss Crafty and it's developemnt
in a reasonable, sane manner are welcome to join. I won't put up with
arguing and fighting.
--
John Perry pe...@jpunix.com PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome!
WWW - http://www.jpunix.com
PGP 2.62 key for pe...@jpunix.com is on the keyservers.
http://rc5stats.distributed.net/tmsummary.idc?TM=4264 for freechess.org RC5.
Sean
> I've always been swearing you fucking moron.
My My Davey Boy judging by your posts at ICD/CCC/HYATT you have some sort of
split personality similiar to your's and my favorite troll doll Dr. Bobo !
> His crap? What crap?
Do you honestly believe Davey Boy that Hyattian theories and foot in mouth
disease did not bring this upon himself ??
> What have YOU done to help anybody?
I have helped many people....now "US" have driven off the enemy and claim
victory !
Nah Nah Nah Hey Hey Hey Good Bye !!
> You're just a tiny man with a tiny brain.
I only twelve !
> Motherfucker
Hey I am only twelve I told you !
Regards,
The Apostle Sean
"Who put the mad in the mad house baby....."You Did Baby"..."You Did"
Avi
Without you posting here.
At least we have CCC to keep reading,learning and enjoying
Your posts.
See you there then.
Avi.
Robert Hyatt wrote in message <7dcc8u$435$1...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>...
Peter Klausler
>if I disappear (to CCC and the Crafty mailing list) part of the
>'reason' for his garbage in this newsgroup will go away. I am
>also going to discontinue the ftp site for Crafty source and exe-
>cutables. I will continue providing Eugene's tablebase files and
>the 'plytest' data that the JICCA article Monty and I wrote men-
>tions, but no more crafty distributions will take place via
>anonymous ftp.
I might as well take CDB off the web as well then, since
it's not terribly useful without a good chess engine.
Christopher R. Dorr
Sean wrote in message <0nqK2.4531$_47....@news2.giganews.com>...
>Robert Hyatt <hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu> wrote in message
>news:7dcc8u$435$1...@juniper.cis.uab.edu...
>
>> After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
>> the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'.
>
>No Dr. Bobo we beat you and now you have to climb back over the wire with
>your Voodoo troll dolls.
No actually, Little Seanie, it means that a college professor has better
things to do with his time than to deal with a semi-literate yokel like you.
You don't seem to get it. You didn't win...you lost! You lost access to a
helpful, intelligent leader in his field. You could have chosen to learn
something (obviously you need to...you are rated about 1100 at chess, so you
ned to learn chess, and you could never figure out how to get Crafty to
work, so you clearly need to learn something about computers), but instead
you found a forum to boost your self-importance (by being an ass) in order
to make yourself seem worthwhile. Bob lost nothing...CCC (which you got
yourself kicked out of for being a jerk) provides everybody who is truly
interested in computer chess a positive forum for education, discussion, and
enjoyment. *Without* the noise created by idiots like you and Rolf.
>
>>What
>> that means, simply, is that I finally realized that no matter how
>> much time I spend defending myself (or others that no longer post
>> here because they tired of having to defend themselves and wisely
>> left), there is no way to ultimately win this battle. DB will
>> forever be called a 'cheat' by Rolf. People will forever be in-
>> sulted by Sean.
>
>People insult me such as you as was proven with Hyatt Watch...you are
>leaving because Hyatt Watch proved; using you're own words that you are a
>troll doll and nothing more...I am surmizing the UAB told you to stop
>posting here at rgcc or risk being fired from you're job due to disgraceful
>behaviour !
>
He's leaving because he shouldn't have to put up with such nonsense. The
*vast* majority of people here believe you to be nothing but a fool and a
loser. The same majority believes Rolf to be 'off his rocker', and the same
majority believes Hyatt Watch to be pathetic.
>>And 'Zarathustra' and his alter-egos seem to be
>> intent on following me so long as I continue to post here.
>
>You were beaten by the facts and the truth Bob, nothing more !
Again, Little Seanie, he wasn't beaten! I realize that you're probably not
bright enough to understand this, but sometimes the smart thing to do is to
escape an uncomfortable situation. You made it uncomfortable, but you seem
too dense to understand why.
Actually tens of thousand of users do. And they (unlike you) seem smart
enough to figure out how it works!
>> I say this will be my 'next-to-final' post, because I do plan one
>> more post in a few weeks. Once certain events have been handled
>> here, I do plan on one more post to supply the real name, ad-
>> dress, and phone number of our 'anonymous stalker'. Since I
>> don't believe anyone should be allowed to run over our newsgroup
>> freely. Of course, anyone can do the necessary 'detective work'
>> on their own, if interested.
>>> Note that you can always find me at hy...@cis.uab.edu, or at
>> www.icdchess.com/ccc/ where the 'stalkers' are not welcome and
>> not allowed.
>
>CCC where the people who are unable to defend themselves from the facts
also
>hide like Dr. Bobo !
>
It's where people who actually care about computer chess go. It where
*sensible* people are *allowed* to go.
>>If you'd like to see a less 'noisy' discussion area
>> (although web-based which I don't like as well as usenet news)
>> feel free to join 'us' there. And if there is an interest in
>> (finally) turning this into a moderated newsgroup, I'm always
>> willing to help, as that would be one way to 'take
>> rec.games.chess.computer' "back" from the 'problems'. IE can you
>> imagine a r.g.c.c without Rolf, Sean or "Z"? Is that 'image'
>> good enough to start the process? Because we know where apathy
>> leads.
>
>>To a newsgroup overrun with people only interested in
>> posting nonsense personal attacks, and _nothing_ else.
>
>Sounds like you Dr. Bobo now that you have left perhaps things will calm
>down !
>
Yes indeed! You and Rolf can now use discuss computer chess between
yourselves, using all your collected 'expertise'!
>> We know because we are _there_ almost. There will continue to be
>> good posters here, Until they become targets. And the cycle
>> continues, and the number of good posters dwindles.
>>
>> In any case, I am now returning to what I should have been doing
>> more of, namely trying to make Crafty better, rather than trying
>> to make this newsgroup more informative.
>
>
>> respectfully yours,
>>
>> Bob Hyatt
>
>unrespectfully yours,
>
>The Apostle Sean
>
Seanie, you are a loser, and a fool. And a bigot to boot. Not a good
combination. You understand nothing about chess or computers (as you have
clearly demonstrated numerous times), and you are too stupid to realize that
you don't know.
I agree with Bob, and believe he has the right solution. So I'm doing the
same. I realize that nobody else contributes a fraction of what Bob did
here, but I am a Master, who perhaps might have had some insight to chess
and computers (not all that many Masters here, it seems), and I am following
suit. Immediately following this post, RGCC is coming off my newsgroup list.
I got sick of Rolf's nonsense a few years ago, and stopped reading for a
while (a year or so), and now I've gotten sick of your gibberish.
I'll be at CCC, discussing computer chess. And not being bothered with
trivial fools like you. Anybody else interested in computer chess, I
strongly advise to subscribe to CCC. It's got the best information about
computer chess, it's got the best experts online, and it *doesn't* have any
fools or freaks like you. Perhaps one day you'll get some help. Perhaps one
day, you'll be worth bothering with. But until then, you're just too trivial
to bother with.
See you in the funny papers. (And at CCC).
Chris Dorr
USCF Master
Sean
news:36fa6...@news.one.net...
I figured the local "Queer" would show up eventually !
> No actually, Little Seanie, it means that a college professor has better
> things to do with his time than to deal with a semi-literate yokel like
you.
He is leaving because his integrity is question by Hyatt Watch he knows he
could lose his job at UAB because of it, therefore, he has resigned a beaten
man !!
Three cheers for the victory...
Hip Hip Hooray !.....Hip Hip Hooray !.....Hip Hip Hooray......!
A great day at rec.games.chess.computer Hyatt is finished here now !
>you are rated about 1100 at chess, so you
Actually my rating at Chess4U is between 1250 and 1350 but I think I can get
it up to 1700 in a year or two of practice...remember there is no chess in
Canada so I am at a slight disadvantage !
> He's leaving because he shouldn't have to put up with such nonsense.
Hyatt is leaving because he is beaten and he knows it ! He was beaten by
his own words at Hyatt watch....now he must hide from the truth at the
CCC....unable to defend himself in the Public Domain....let him wallow in
the caves at the CCC...the light shines brightly amongst "The Chosen
Guardians" at rgcc ! We have won !
> Again, Little Seanie, he wasn't beaten! I realize that you're probably not
> bright enough to understand this, but sometimes the smart thing to do is
to
> escape an uncomfortable situation. You made it uncomfortable, but you seem
> too dense to understand why.
Yes it was uncomfortable for Dr. Bobo, his head was snapped back by Hyatt
Watch so hard he has resigned from rgcc forever "His Words"......Poor
Bob...!
> Actually tens of thousand of users do. And they (unlike you) seem smart
> enough to figure out how it works!
It is just a piece of Crapty ask Kasparov he knows !
> It's where people who actually care about computer chess go. It where
> *sensible* people are *allowed* to go.
Every person who has been allegedly kicked out of the CCC is still there
"Little Missy" we are all there posting under assumed names........We are
part of the rgcc under ground movement to destroy evil in all it's fascists
!
> Seanie, you are a loser, and a fool. And a bigot to boot.
I would say in this case "US" is the winner, the brighter and smarter ! If
being anti-homosexual makes a person a bigot so be it.....but you have the
disease Miss Dorr and you have to live with that ! I do not !
> I agree with Bob, and believe he has the right solution. So I'm doing the
> same.
Yes ! Another victory the little homo Christopher Dorr-Knob is leaving
also......!! Another beaten women? ...man ? whatever !
> See you in the funny papers. (And at CCC).
> Chris Dorr
> USCF Master
USCF Masturbater more like !
Have fun with you boyfriends at the CCC, we shall not be joining you !
Cheers,
Sean
Charles Milton Ling
Dear Bob,
I am really, truly, deeply sad to see you leave. RGCC will be a poorer
place for your absence. Although I have no pretensions to anything more
than the most rudimentary knowledge of computers, it was always a
pleasure to read your posts (particularly, for me, those reminiscing of
the days when there was still a "brave new world" ahead).
I admit, however, that, regret it as I might, I understand and respect
your decision. Putting myself in your position (as far as I can
manage), I think I would have thrown the towel in long ago. It was
indeed cruel, yes even heartless, to misuse your accessibility to those
who truly seek assistance and the exchange of ideas in the furtherance
of ambitions I can only call deranged.
It is a great comfort to know that you will still be around on CCC (and
ICC, for that matter, it's Knallo writing here).
See you there!
Charley
flum
Hyatt is gone! This newsgroup is safe for morons once again!
UltraB
Sean mumbled in message ...
>Actually my rating at Chess4U is between 1250 and 1350 but I think I can
get>it up to 1700 in a year or two of practice...remember there is no chess
in
>Canada so I am at a slight disadvantage !
>
Sean ever heard of the CFC or a Chess Club !! not sure nor interested where
you live but Chess in Canada is active, you just need to get away from your
keyboard and find it.
The CFC has a website where you will find a listing of affiliated Canadian
Chess clubs and even of tournaments, just not sure if they have them for up
to 1350 Chess4U ratings :-).
I am also in Canada and don't feel in any way at a dissadvantage
to living here.
.
asked Bob Hyatt various questions about Crafty via the Crafty mailing list
and by e-mail. All I can say is that his responses have without exception
been prompt, courteous and most helpful.
It seems to me that when a person is skilled enough to write a program such
as Cratfy, gracious enough to offer it to the public free of charge and then
willing to offer support and advice to anyone asking, then that person
deserves respect and thanks from those of us who benefit from his hard work.
I think his decision to leave the group is the correct one - I would
certainly have done so long ago. It is obvious, however, that he is the
mainstay of the group, and the small number of people who have caused this
to happen can, therefore, be compared to a cancerous tumour. From their
point of view, they have "won the battle", in fact by attacking the 'host',
all they have brought about is there own destruction. The rest of us,
including me, will now merely switch to a more restricted forum such as the
mailing list.
It seems, as a race, that us humans have a way to go yet.
Tim Holland
Dann Corbit
have won. 99% of what goes on here is noise now, so posting here is
relatively pointless now. Sadly, the same thing seems to be going on in most
of Usenet. Ten years ago it was this incredible medium where sharp minds
would meet together and share. Now it is becoming a cesspool of lowlife
scum who only want to damage and contribute nothing. I may post an
occasional announcement, but I won't be reading or posting normally either.
--
C-FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
"The C-FAQ Book" ISBN 0-201-84519-9
C.A.P. Newsgroup http://www.dejanews.com/~c_a_p
C.A.P. FAQ: ftp://38.168.214.175/pub/Chess%20Analysis%20Project%20FAQ.htm
geo...@my-dejanews.com
"Sean" <Apostl...@wolf-web.com> wrote:
> Robert Hyatt <hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu> wrote in message
> news:7dcc8u$435$1...@juniper.cis.uab.edu...
> > In any case, I am now returning to what I should have been doing
> > more of, namely trying to make Crafty better, rather than trying
> > to make this newsgroup more informative.
>
> It's about time...your program has fallen so far behind it is now
> ridiculously poor "Relatively Speaking" as per Gary Kasparov !
>
> > respectfully yours,
> >
> > Bob Hyatt
>
> unrespectfully yours,
>
> The Apostle Sean
>
I discovered Crafty yesterday, apparently just in the nick of time.
Would you tell me, Sean, where I can download a copy of your program
so I can compare them?
Geoff Sheffield
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Sean
news:yLuK2.689$_3.32...@bunson.tor.sfl.net...
Well "L' ill Britches" you talk the talk behind your false name and
remailer address....why do not you post under your real name "only cowards
like Hyatt" need run and hide their heads from "THE TRUTH" look at the
losers run without their boyfriend Hyatt to protect them anymore they are
all gone........slobs !
> Sean ever heard of the CFC
I live one (1) block away from it ! So yes I have heard of it.....I am
surmizing you have never been in it so let me describe....
It is a single room with a storage room out back it is a run down
"Shit-hole" improperly managed by strange people...there is no chess classes
there just a couple of input computers and racks of books ! Not much
there to see actually !
> or a Chess Club !!
No decent chess clubs in Ottawa, ON, Canada......perhaps you live in
"Tarana" ON. ....but you are still hiding behind your troll name so you are
just another Hyattian coward...run with your friends to the CCC and pretend
to be interested in the truth but you shall never find it in a censored
group !
>not sure nor interested where
> you live but Chess in Canada is active, you just need to get away from
your
> keyboard and find it.
heehee....obviously you do not live in Canada !
> The CFC has a website where you will find a listing of affiliated Canadian
> Chess clubs and even of tournaments, just not sure if they have them for
up
> to 1350 Chess4U ratings :-).
Chess4U "WAS" a nice free club to play at but it appears to have shut down I
did not recheck today !
> I am also in Canada and don't feel in any way at a dissadvantage
> to living here
Perhaps you are only disSadvantaged because of your lack of spelling ability
and therefore, I presume you are a high school drop out !
Have fun,
Sean
Smart Canadian Boy (I'm only twelve (12) ask Dr. Bobo he knows !)
Dr. Bobo can only be found now at the CCC, he has been tagged and bagged a
liar and a troll at "Hyatt Watch" ........See our Doctor run and hide behind
the barbwire with his "other" friends !!
Henning Hansen
> After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
> the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'. What
>
> In any case, I am now returning to what I should have been doing
> more of, namely trying to make Crafty better, rather than trying
> to make this newsgroup more informative.
>
>
> Bob Hyatt
>
>
Don't forget to write that book !!!
--
Henning Hansen
UltraB
Sean mumbled again in message ...
>UltraB <Ult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:yLuK2.689$_3.32...@bunson.tor.sfl.net...
>
>Well "L' ill Britches" you talk the talk behind your false name and
>remailer address....why do not you post under your real name "only cowards
>like Hyatt" need run and hide their heads from "THE TRUTH" look at the
>losers run without their boyfriend Hyatt to protect them anymore they are
>all gone........slobs !
>
instead of watching your own ramblings you would have seen it. My name is
Sarah Bird, I live in Scarborough Ontario.
>> Sean ever heard of the CFC
>
>I live one (1) block away from it ! So yes I have heard of it.....I am
>surmizing you have never been in it so let me describe....
Beeeeeeep Incorrect as usual.
>
>It is a single room with a storage room out back it is a run down
>"Shit-hole" improperly managed by strange people...there is no chess
classes
>there just a couple of input computers and racks of books ! Not much
>there to see actually !
I said heard of !! not ever seen it, duh.
>
>> or a Chess Club !!
>
>No decent chess clubs in Ottawa, ON, Canada......perhaps you live in
>"Tarana" ON. ....but you are still hiding behind your troll name so you are
>just another Hyattian coward...run with your friends to the CCC and pretend
>to be interested in the truth but you shall never find it in a censored
>group !
Ohh I am far from being a coward, and yes I have lots of friends.
If you ever come to Scarborough I could introduce you to some.
>
>>not sure nor interested where
>> you live but Chess in Canada is active, you just need to get away from
>your
>> keyboard and find it.
>
>heehee....obviously you do not live in Canada !
beeeeeep again tut, tut. Do you ever get anything right. If you had bothered
reading the rest of the original post before bothering to reply you might
have got this one right.
>
>> The CFC has a website where you will find a listing of affiliated
Canadian
>> Chess clubs and even of tournaments, just not sure if they have them for
>up
>> to 1350 Chess4U ratings :-).
>
>Chess4U "WAS" a nice free club to play at but it appears to have shut down
I
>did not recheck today !
Who cares!
>
>> I am also in Canada and don't feel in any way at a dissadvantage
>> to living here
>
>Perhaps you are only disSadvantaged because of your lack of spelling
ability
>and therefore, I presume you are a high school drop out !
Aghhhh a spelling mistake, wow. You are so sharp Sean must be why you hold a
1200 plus CFU rating hahahaha, rofl.
>
>Have fun,
I do reading your moronic rantings, lol.
>
>Sean twelve (12)
>
>Smart Canadian Boy (I'm only twelve (12) ask Dr. Bobo he knows !)
No Sean your not twelve (12). You only act like twelve (12).
And as for smart, god get a life.
>
>Dr. Bobo can only be found now at the CCC, he has been tagged and bagged a
>liar and a troll at "Hyatt Watch" ........See our Doctor run and hide
behind
>the barbwire with his "other" friends !!
>
It's not a matter of running child, it is a matter of talking to people who
respect the opinions of others without feeling the need to get themselves
involved in things they no very little or nothing about.
Cheers.
UltraB aka Sarah Bird.
UltraB
geo...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message
<7de2im$vht$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
>> news:7dcc8u$435$1...@juniper.cis.uab.edu...
>> > In any case, I am now returning to what I should have been doing
>> > more of, namely trying to make Crafty better, rather than trying
>> > to make this newsgroup more informative.
>>
>> It's about time...your program has fallen so far behind it is now
>> ridiculously poor "Relatively Speaking" as per Gary Kasparov !
>>
>> > respectfully yours,
>> >
>> > Bob Hyatt
>>
>> unrespectfully yours,
>>
>> The Apostle Sean
>>
>
>Would you tell me, Sean, where I can download a copy of your program
>so I can compare them?
>Geoff Sheffield
Sean's program or is it programme Sean, I can't spell as I'm a drop-out.
Anyway it can be located at: www.nonothing/aboutchess/or/computer.chess
UltraB
Sean
> >Chess4U "WAS" a nice free club to play at but it appears to have shut
down
> >I did not recheck today !
> Who cares!
oyo Sarah Bird......a chick huh ?! I thought Bobby Fischer stated
"chickies were weakies" at chess and shouldn't bother playing !
BTW:) I care it was / is ? as nice club !
> Aghhhh a spelling mistake, wow. You are so sharp Sean
Thank you for recognizing my superior intellect "Sweet Sarah" !
> It's not a matter of running child, it is a matter of talking to people
who
> respect the opinions of others without feeling the need to get themselves
> involved in things they no very little or nothing about.
> Cheers.
> UltraB aka Sarah Bird
Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones ! A Canadian chick
with an attitude !! Gotta luv it !
How about a little kiss Sarah...."I know you want to !!"
Regards,
The Apostle Sean
Richard Heldmann
Thank you for participating here at rgcc. It was a pleasure to have the
opportunity to read your posts. They were informative and humorous. You
will be missed!
See you at CCC!
Rick Heldmann
UltraB
Sean mumbled yet again in message and after a large amount of un-noted
cutting stretched his intellect
to<37xK2.5296$_47....@news2.giganews.com>...
>> >Chess4U "WAS" a nice free club to play at but it appears to have shut
>down
>> >I did not recheck today !
>
>> Who cares!
>
>oyo Sarah Bird......a chick huh ?! I thought Bobby Fischer stated
>"chickies were weakies" at chess and shouldn't bother playing !
>
Do you always listen to other peoples opinions? or did you not learn to
formulate your own. Also if you had read what Fischer had said you would see
that the words you utter are not correct.
>BTW:) I care it was / is ? as nice club !
>
It has 10 computers and you Sean that's all. And in fact I tried it and TBF
it sucked.
>> Aghhhh a spelling mistake, wow. You are so sharp Sean
>
>Thank you for recognizing my superior intellect "Sweet Sarah" !
>
You clipped the rest of the sentence which read "must be why you hold a 1200
plus CFU rating hahahaha, rofl." However I think you got the point.
>> It's not a matter of running child, it is a matter of talking to people
>who
>> respect the opinions of others without feeling the need to get themselves
>> involved in things they no very little or nothing about.
>
>> Cheers.
>> UltraB aka Sarah Bird
>
>Those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones !
You should think of that before you post the endless tripe that lots of us
suffer through. But I for one will suffer no longer.
UltraB.
David Franklin
but still...
>Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>> After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
>> the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'.
Damn. I can't say I'm surprised. I would have got tired of the
situation a hell of a long time ago.
As many others have commented, I think that just about
wraps it up for rgcc. I can't see me reading here any more.
Although I've seen people driven out of newsgroups before,
this situation is a new one to me. For the person who
contributes so much more to the newsgroup than anyone else
(with no offense meant to Bruce, Dann, Ed, et. al.) that it will
not survive without them to be driven out is somewhat obscene.
[A couple of comments about individuals that I perhaps
shouldn't make, but will:
ChrisW: There are several idiots who have given Bob a hard
time, but unfortunately you weren't one of them. No, you
have written a good program, you have been around the
block, and *you knew exactly what you were doing*. I'm
disgusted. And you know, I look back over the last few
months, and I can't remember a single thing you've contrib-
uted to this newsgroup (aside from insults, accusations
and innuendo, that is).
Sean: You are a git. That goes without saying. But cool
it with the obscene postings to anyone with a female name.
Not only does it mark you as completely pathetic, but
should anyone want to cause trouble for you, it should be
a good nail to hang you by. (to Paula - *please* complain
about this cretin. Damn - *I* was embarrassed by what
he posted).
end of off charter bitching but couldn't help myself]
Bob, you probably don't remember, but I asked you some stuff
about tablebase generation about 3 years ago. You were
most helpful and courteous despite my naivity to the
subject. It was appreciated.
>> What
>> that means, simply, is that I finally realized that no matter how
>> much time I spend defending myself (or others that no longer post
>> here because they tired of having to defend themselves and wisely
>> left), there is no way to ultimately win this battle.
I'm sure that many times Bob has felt he was standing alone against
the horde, and I'm feeling a certain amount of guilt, because I kept
postponing the post where I told various people what I felt about
them, and now it's too late. Something I've heard said (w.r.t WW2):
"For evil to prosper, all that is necessary is for good men to do
nothing."
(I hope those with N*zi fixations appreciate the irony, because I'm
damn sure they've been playing on the silent majority's apathy).
>>DB will
>> forever be called a 'cheat' by Rolf. People will forever be in-
>> sulted by Sean. And 'Zarathustra' and his alter-egos seem to be
>> intent on following me so long as I continue to post here. The
>> "Sam Sloan conspiracy theory" will be rehashed every time someone
>> thinks it will damage my (or other members of the CB team) repu-
>> tation.
Yup. I know when I saw the Sam Sloan stuff I was thinking I'd be
going absolutely ballistic if I were you, though in fact you handled it
remarkably well and calmly. I don't think Rolf and co. understand
how serious their cheating allegations are - and sadly we seem to
be in "big lie" territory here - if people don't call them on it, they
consider their allegations proved.
>> 99.9% of the folks here have been enjoyable to chat with, argue
>> with, or compromise with. I certainly apologize for being a
>> 'lightning rod' and providing a ready target for our 'stalkers';
>> and for sometimes allowing myself to be provoked to the point of
>> using language I don't normally use. However, after getting pro-
>> voked _so many_ times, I hope most at least understand 'why'.
I certainly understand why. The Hyatt-watch stuff has been
frustrating, because it (of course) hides the 'why', so it looks like
constant over-reaction. But (to analogize), when someone like Rolf
keeps defecating on your carpet, he's apt to get ejected as soon as
he starts fiddling with his belt buckle.
>> The down side is that as more of 'us' leave, all that will be
>> left is 'them'. Not a pretty sight.
But at this rate, who will be watching?
>> And if there is an interest in
>> (finally) turning this into a moderated newsgroup, I'm always
>> willing to help, as that would be one way to 'take
>> rec.games.chess.computer' "back" from the 'problems'. IE can you
>> imagine a r.g.c.c without Rolf, Sean or "Z"?
I would vote in favour. And if you could stand it, I'd be happy with
you as a moderator, FWIW.
>> respectfully yours,
>>
>> Bob Hyatt
Best wishes, and many thanks for your long standing contributions.
David Franklin
Sean
> Do you always listen to other peoples opinions?
Bobby Fischer isn't a person he is the Messiah ! Don't girls know anything
?!
> It has 10 computers and you Sean that's all. And in fact I tried it and
TBF
> it sucked.
Ten (10) computers and me, what more could a girl ask for ?? "TBF" sorry to
trouble you but the acronym eludes moi ! I heard the Tarana girlies go
crazy over us French Canadians ??
> >> Aghhhh a spelling mistake, wow. You are so sharp Sean
Yes I know that !
> You should think of that before you post the endless tripe that lots of us
> suffer through. But I for one will suffer no longer.
> UltraB
Sarah Ultra B...may I ask what the Ultra stands for or am I allowed to guess
! heehee !@!
Luv,
Sean
Sean
> time, but unfortunately you weren't one of them. No, you
> have written a good program, you have been around the
> block, and *you knew exactly what you were doing*. I'm
> disgusted. And you know, I look back over the last few
> months, and I can't remember a single thing you've contrib-
> uted to this newsgroup (aside from insults, accusations
> and innuendo, that is).
> it with the obscene postings to anyone with a female name.
> Not only does it mark you as completely pathetic, but
> should anyone want to cause trouble for you, it should be
> a good nail to hang you by.
> the horde, and I'm feeling a certain amount of guilt, because I kept
> postponing the post where I told various people what I felt about
> them, and now it's too late. Something I've heard said (w.r.t WW2):
> "For evil to prosper, all that is necessary is for good men to do
> nothing."
> frustrating, because it (of course) hides the 'why', so it looks like
> constant over-reaction.
> you as a moderator, FWIW.
> David Franklin
--
If You "SISSIES" Dare To Play Me A Game
UltraB
Sean again cut without mention then mumbled in message ...
>UltraB <Ult...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:bayK2.702$_3.33...@bunson.tor.sfl.net...
>
>> Do you always listen to other peoples opinions?
>
>Bobby Fischer isn't a person he is the Messiah ! Don't girls know anything
>?!
>
maybe Bobby is the messiah after all.!! with all that love he has for the
jewish race. I always wondered if Fischer was gay, I read all those rumors
about him in Argentina but never believed them. Is that your attraction with
Fischer Sean.
>> It has 10 computers and you Sean that's all. And in fact I tried
>it and TBF it sucked.
>
>Ten (10) computers and me, what more could a girl ask for ??
Someone, something, anything that was like errrrr normal.
>"TBF" sorry to trouble you but the acronym eludes moi !
We can't all be experts at everything, it means To Be Fair !!.
> I heard the Tarana girlies go
Sean in fact it is TO ladies !!
>crazy over us French Canadians ??
You are not a French Canadian, you stated you were in Ottawa.
Last time I checked it was still the capital of Canada. And personally I am
not a lover of the French.
>Yes I know that !
Been there.
>> You should think of that before you post the endless tripe that lots of
us suffer through. But I for one will suffer no longer.
>
>> UltraB
>
>Sarah Ultra B...may I ask what the Ultra stands
It means the best Seanie, as in Ultimate. The "B" comes from my second name
Bird.
Sean
> Sorry, but BF is far from the messiah. Wasn't the messiah a hebrew, hmmmm
> maybe Bobby is the messiah after all.!! with all that love he has for the
> jewish race. I always wondered if Fischer was gay, I read all those rumors
> about him in Argentina but never believed them. Is that your attraction
with
> Fischer Sean.
Huh ?? Bobby's gay ! NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!! *Cry*
> >Ten (10) computers and me, what more could a girl ask for ??
> Someone, something, anything that was like errrrr normal.
You do not think I am normal Sarah !? Why would you ever think such a thing
?!
> >"TBF" sorry to trouble you but the acronym eludes moi !
> We can't all be experts at everything, it means To Be Fair !!
Got it !
> Sean in fact it is TO ladies !!
Sarah you shall make a gentleman of me yet !.... I am just a gem in the
rough *smile*
> You are not a French Canadian, you stated you were in Ottawa.
How close is Ottawa to Hull ?
> Last time I checked it was still the capital of Canada.
Only in name...the Capital of Canada is actually Quebec City run by Premier
Bouchard, Chretien is just a puppet !
>And personally I am not a lover of the French.
Okay I am not French then, what are you attracted Sweetie (Somalians ?)
> >Sarah Ultra B...may I ask what the Ultra stands
> It means the best Seanie, as in Ultimate. The "B" comes from my second
name
> Bird
You better send me private emails from now Sarah this is getting good !
The Pope has sent me a private email and asked me to apologize to you :)
As is the custom at rgcc to honour our leader's wishes I humbly apologize to
you.
Sean
UltraB
Sean crawled in message ...
>news:zUyK2.715$_3.34...@bunson.tor.sfl.net...
>
>The Pope has sent me a private email and asked me to apologize to you :)
>
>As is the custom at rgcc to honour our leader's wishes I humbly apologize
to you.
>
not have your own thoughts. Why apologize because someone asks you to. Can't
you tell if you should make an apology or not alone without help. So you are
on good terms with both the Pope and the Messiah, hmmm a Catholic and a
Hebrew. And let's be correct....the Pope is YOUR leader not anyone else's.
TTFN UltraB
Rolf Tueschen
<zuzK2.5648$_47....@news2.giganews.com>:
>The Pope has sent me a private email and asked me to apologize to you :)
>As is the custom at rgcc to honour our leader's wishes I humbly apologize to
>you.
I asked My Apostle to further leave out associations to jokes about
women and gay people. We shouldn't do that in a cc group. -- All parts
of our population are welcome! Let's enjoy computer chess together!
--The Pope
>Sean
UltraB
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7deh7m$4ea$1...@news00.btx.dtag.de>...
>I asked Sean to further leave out associations to jokes about
>women and gay people. We shouldn't do that in a cc group. -- All parts
>of our population are welcome! Let's enjoy computer chess together!
>
Too bad you didn't ask Sean that prior to some of his more recent efforts.
UltraB.
Todd Durham
Rolf Tueschen wrote:
> "UltraB" <Ult...@hotmail.com> wrote in
> <tQzK2.759$_3.34...@bunson.tor.sfl.net>:
>
> >Too bad you didn't ask Sean that prior to some of his more recent efforts.
> >UltraB.
>
> Was away for a couple of days. But I can't and won't want to direct the
> motivation of other members. However in case of the mentioned topics I
> thought it a good idea to raise my voice. Also against the background
> that too many experts here kept their mouth shut when some people went
> ballistic in questions of politics. It will always be a puzzle to me why
> this was done in a computer chess group. And more. After I criticised
> the like off-topics, I was scapegoated as if I had _started or invented_
> the like off-topics.
Rolf, your protests are weak. You've repeatedly called people you disagree with
fascists for espousing far less nasty positions than Sean has: Sean would
apparently be happier if all gay people were lined up in front of a ditch and
shot and would apparently be happy to rape and beat any woman he met if he felt
like it. (And he apparently does feel like it, given his posts to Paula and
UltraB.) Where are your repeated calls for Sean to behave himself? I have yet
to see you call Sean to task for HIS off topic rants. The same goes for
Zarathustra and all his alter egos. (You are aware, Rolf, that such Nietzschean
references were a hallmark of the Nazis and remain a favorite of neo-Nazis to
this day, aren't you?) How many times have you either sat idly by while Sean or
Z have 'shouted' down people in rgcc by the shear weight of their imbecilic
and, quite often, down right foul opinions? How many times have you
participated? How many times have you praised someone in one paragraph only to
assasinate their character in the next? In short, Rolf, what have you done to
make the rgcc a better place? And don't speak to me (or this group) about
saving us from Hyatt. You know who the instigators are, you know what was done
to whom, and now, thanks completely to Sean, Z and yourself, you've just made
it that much harder for those of us interested in chess programming to learn
more about the subject.
Todd
Rolf Tueschen
Jeroen ;-}
But I can understand that people get tired from it.
Without giving any opinion about flame wars over sayings or whatever it is a
loss that you have to leave the group, Bob. Whatever the fights, whatever
the trouble, with Crafty development you advanced and still advance
computer chess for a lot of people. Internet and Usenet should be the place
to communicate with each other, and disappearing behind walls of any kind is
a pity. Shame we don't have the courtesy to make the internet a
communicative "happy place to be".
That's the way it goes, folks, Internet is growing up :-((
Jeroen ;-}
btw Bob, you still can READ rgcc from time to time.......:-))
Jake
Sean wrote something like.......
:Hello group,
Sean your worthless lowlife. You have finally done it.
For 3 years I have followed this NG. Now the reason for my interest is gone.
Whoever you are you are, in my eyes you are a complete scumbag!
Jacob Lindquist
Developer [AI] CPH DK
David Rasmussen
>
> David Rasmussen <ho...@kampsax.dtu.dk> wrote in message
> news:36FA374B...@kampsax.dtu.dk...
>
> > I've always been swearing you fucking moron.
>
> My My Davey Boy judging by your posts at ICD/CCC/HYATT you have some sort of
> split personality similiar to your's and my favorite troll doll Dr. Bobo !
I've never posted to anything but rgcc, you bleeding idiot.
>
> > His crap? What crap?
>
> Do you honestly believe Davey Boy that Hyattian theories and foot in mouth
> disease did not bring this upon himself ??
Please don't smoke crack while you're posting, it makes you even MORE
incoherent.
>
> > What have YOU done to help anybody?
>
> I have helped many people....
WHO? And with WHAT?
--
David Rasmussen
"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be." Roger
Waters
"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans." John
Lennon
Floyd Code: v1.2a r+d>s TW 1/0/pw tG sqrt(-1)? 0 DSotM 3 2 <6jun98>
David Rasmussen
> A lot of crack influenced incoherent bullshit
So did anybody see that film Scream 2?
gbpa...@my-dejanews.com
I echo your comments exactly. In yesteryear, one could read
most any post here and learn something, or have something made
clear by all the wonderful posters. Today, you have to sort
through maybe 80 posts to find the 5-6 that are useful.
Now Sean signs his monicker as the "one who saved rgcc".
How sad. As others have noted, the top posters have all left
one by one due to the personal attacks, etc. I too will
happily spend my time on CCC and get back to learning something.
It is what this place WAS. To the others who will remain...
enjoy the BS!
Thank gawd for ICD!
In article <scvK2.64398$rs2.18...@client.news.psi.net>,
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Rolf Tueschen
(Therefore by email and into the newsgroups.)
Todd Durham <sp...@gator.net> wrote in <36FAD7BB...@gator.net>:
>Rolf, your protests are weak.
Please try to respect our different tempers ... :)
>You've repeatedly called people you disagree with
>fascists for espousing far less nasty positions than Sean has:
Please stop it. If you are really interested in such a topic then call
me by email and I will anwer you. Here in a computer chess group this is
off-topic. Only this, I did NEVER _call_ people this or that without
explanation and justification. It's not the disagreement that led to
such a label but the writings of a member here. Please try to understand
the difference.
>Sean would
>apparently be happier if all gay people were lined up in front of a ditch and
>shot and would apparently be happy to rape and beat any woman he met if he felt
>like it. (And he apparently does feel like it, given his posts to Paula and
>UltraB.)
Could you do me a favor? And post the exact quotes from Sean where you
have seen what you are claiming here? I read all that too and had a
completely different impression. Not that I agreed but I didn't see such
things you want to insinuate. But again post me the evidence and I will
possibly reconsider. Sean didn't write of shooting and r___g. At least I
didn't read it. Perhaps you could also try to understand that I'm not at
all a sort of babysitter here in the group. Also I want to give you this
here to think about: if you want to stop someone from doing something
it's often much more promissing if you oppose him in something he could
possibly understand without too much stress. If you however want to
punish all kind of expressions you'll end without success because
constant punishment here in this virtual reality (other than the real
world) has no consequences at all. Also try to understand that if Sean
really had written what you insinuated it would be hopeless to try to
influence him with words alone. Also and finally try to understand that
nobody here should be invited to be such a watchman you wanted me to be.
>Where are your repeated calls for Sean to behave himself?
As to the effects of mere repetitions please read above ...
>I have yet
>to see you call Sean to task for HIS off topic rants. The same goes for
>Zarathustra and all his alter egos. (You are aware, Rolf, that such Nietzschean
>references were a hallmark of the Nazis and remain a favorite of neo-Nazis to
>this day, aren't you?)
You mean, if someone would take the anonymous pseudonym 'Adolf' that
then _I_ should oppose such a doing? -- Why can't _you_ do this for me?
Again, I'm not the night-sister here in rgcc.
>how many times have you either sat idly by while Sean or
>Z have 'shouted' down people in rgcc by the shear weight of their imbecilic
>and, quite often, down right foul opinions?
How do you know how I sit and with what emotions? Are you a
clair-voyant?
>How many times have you
>participated? How many times have you praised someone in one paragraph only to
>assasinate their character in the next?
You have that tendency to digress. But I'm game. I take the bait. Please
send me all the evidence you have for such character assassinations. You
must be really confused about the real history here. Take a look into
Dejas and do your homework before you make such allegations against me.
I did never do that. But on the contrary I'm the multiple victim of such
character assassinations. Do you have no clue about it? Shall I tell you
the stories, the facts? Again, contaact me via email and I'll tell you
what Ed Schroder (REBEL) and Bob Hyatt (CRAFTY) have done against me!
I want also invite all members who are interested to contact me for
further details. But we shouldn't do that here in public, also when the
concerned persons are no longer members here.
>In short, Rolf, what have you done to
>make the rgcc a better place?
I always argued for a free exchange of opinions without the censorship
by some self-crowned primadonnas. I opposed fascist tendencies. And last
but not least I wrote hundreds of posts about computer chess. BTW in
lively and friendly style with Bob Hyatt.
>And don't speak to me (or this group) about
>saving us from Hyatt.
Please try to seperate Bob Hyatt, the fantastic expert of computer chess
from the ugly Mister Hyatt ... (Either do your home work in Dejas or
contact me via email or just take a short look into Hyatt Watch
Website.)
>You know who the instigators are, you know what was done
>to whom, and now, thanks completely to Sean, Z and yourself, you've just made
>it that much harder for those of us interested in chess programming to learn
>more about the subject.
I don't think that we should give up our hopes that Bob our lovable
computer chess expert will come back to this group if he sees that even
his critics honestly are sad that he has left them. It's a longer
process perhaps for Bob to understand that NOBODY here ever attacked him
for his on-topic expert writings. What was criticised that was the dirty
language and the politically offensive stuff in this international
forum. But take a look into Dejas again. I was always the one who
praised Bob -- beyond all differences -- for his open and authentic
reactions. From a professor _however_ I had expected him to react more
carefully in such delicate off-topics.
As a computer chess lover and addict I must also state that IN A WAY the
absence of Bob Hyatt perhaps can only lead to a significant improvement
of Bob's cc related attempts and contributions. Namely his strong
program, his projects, here the announced book we all waited for, and
last but not least his own state that could only need a few days or
months of holidays after the 25-hours existence here online.
Now comes EDISON into the game! Let's light a candle in the wind ...
Somehow Bob -- as I have known him! -- must be kind of depressed by the
fact that he's not at the next WCCC here in Germany. Oh boy, if I only
had the possibility to manage Crafty on the Atomic Machines in parallel
mode, I would be delighted if Bob would give me the opportunity to
operate his baby only some 30 kilometers from my hometown. I would even
say that the experiment of Crafty on a CRAY would be the absolute dream
of the whole community ... No matter what people might think, if I would
be the resident operator in contact with, err, Alabama, I'm sure that
nothing strange would happen. After the end of DEEP BLUE, we had a new
mark as state of the art. Also under the aspect that CRAY was the
forerunner for DT and DB in the lead at the championships.
You see, Todd, we are now all on ourselves. But with your smart
nit-picking and my creativity we still could make it. Know what I mean?
So, I leave it to you, a) to do all the necessary homework and b) to
contact Bob for the new sensational development here ... :)
>Todd
Nicolai P. Zwar
all the things that have happened here in the past. I read some of these
pro and anti Hyatt posts and found some of them entertaining for a
while, but couldn't figure out what was going on other than that
apparently some people had a problem with you for some reason. When I
read your posts here, however, I always found them to be helpful and
informative, and frankly, it's not very difficult to skip stuff in a
newsgroup that I'm not interested in, which is why I think unmoderated
forums can work well. I always read your posts, in any case, and if you
jump the boat now, I'll respect your decision, of course, and wish you
the best, but I sure am disappointed about it and will miss your posts.
A lot. No chance that you change your mind?
Take care
Cheerio
--
Nicolai P. Zwar
I am made out of water. You wouldn't know it, because I have it bound
in. My friends are made out of water, too. All of them. The problem for
us is that not only do we have to walk around without being absorbed by
the ground but we also have to earn our livings.
(Jack Isidore of Seville, Calif.)
FM
> >you are rated about 1100 at chess, so you
> Actually my rating at Chess4U is between 1250 and 1350
Does it count?
> but I think I can get
> it up to 1700 in a year or two of practice...
Yeah and I think I can beat Kasparov with 10 years of
intense training. BS.
> remember there is no chess in
> Canada so I am at a slight disadvantage !
You're more retarded than I thought.
Todd Durham
Rolf Tueschen wrote:
> These are the minutes after the sensational Big bang in computer chess!
Rolf, I appreciate your email, but it was partly unnecessary. I have no filtered you
out. Sean and Z, yes, but yyou are still in my sight. I will do as you suggest and
take this matter to a personal discussion via email. However, as this will take more
time to have the discussion at the depth you suggest, it will be awhile before I can
respond. (I will be around for shorter posts, however.) In fact, it might not be
until as late as mid-May. I just have a very hectic schedule coming up. If we come
to some sort of personal consensus a that point, perhaps we can bring he discussion
back here. But until then, it will have to wait.
Todd
Dullwitted Slug
>
>Sean mumbled in message ...
>
>>Actually my rating at Chess4U is between 1250 and 1350 but I think I can
>get>it up to 1700 in a year or two of practice...remember there is no chess
>in
>>Canada so I am at a slight disadvantage !
>>
>Sean ever heard of the CFC or a Chess Club !! not sure nor interested where
>you live but Chess in Canada is active, you just need to get away from your
>keyboard and find it.
>The CFC has a website where you will find a listing of affiliated Canadian
>Chess clubs and even of tournaments, just not sure if they have them for up
>to 1350 Chess4U ratings :-).
>I am also in Canada and don't feel in any way at a dissadvantage
>to living here.
>
>
Aren't you the current champion in LadaSara's tournament?
UltraB
Dullwitted Slug wrote in message <36fbea50.25568765@news>...
>>
>Aren't you the current champion in LadaSara's tournament?
No, Sara's tourney is weekly. I won it on Feb 15 beating Dr Mega, so someone
else won last week. Not sure who, probably the computer player Phantom732. I
do play at excite but not very often now and mostly only blitz 2 min games,
as there are far to many computers playing there and no moderators. I assume
you use excite, under what name?.
UltraB.
Rolf Tueschen
<36fbf...@news.one.net>:
>Later in this column, you tell him to go do his research on DejaNews...how
>about you do the same? Sean said these kind of things numerous times (I was
>the target...I *DO* remember), and you said *nothing*. Why?
It's me who wants to ask you that question! Why do you lie here in
public??
Because I wrote weeks ago a clear refutation/ critic against Sean's
allegations and fantasies.
I repeat my question. Why do you lie that I never wrote against such
allegations against you??
Here is what I wrote. You can go into Dejas and examin the posts and
thread.
I expect your clear apologies for spreading lies here in public against
me. I told you times ago that you are not educated enough to bust me.
You are much too inexperienced. So why did you try it always again??
NB that someone attacked me for this noble rejection of the like sexual
allegations. DO YOU WANT TO KNOW WHO THAT SOMEONE WAS??
[quote from dejas for our little Master in USCF:]
in message <7ah8q4$ksc$6...@news03.btx.dtag.de>...
Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>
>P.S. To be on the spot. Personally I would like that Sean would
>immediately stop the shit about alleging homosexuality against people as
>if this would constitute a real _attack_. No offence, Sean, but you
>should stop that. I must tell you that as your elder Brother and Pope.
>Try to fight against Christophers chessic opinions. Prove him wrong when
>he assists someone who spreds fascist shit.
>BTW this sort of stamping
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>people with a homosexual vice is clear fascistic too.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
[quote end no 1]
[actual add-on by me from today:
a certain author and member of rgcc wrote on 18th Feb. 1999 the
following as a comment about my refutation against sexual allegations in
the Sean-style:]
[quote begin no 2]
Again with the fascist stuff? Rolf, you are truly fixated on this,
aren't you? Why do you obsess on this so?
[quote end no 2]
============================================
I want to repeat my claim. I attacked the horrible sexual allegations
from Sean against Christopher R. Dorr. Now my question again. Who wrote
the above statement against me and my attack on Sean??????
Here is the answer:
It was Christopher R. Dorr [USCF Master]!!
Again. Who wrote _today_ that I, Rolf Tueschen, had _never_ criticised
Sean for his attacks and allegations against Christopher R. Dorr???
Answer: It was Christopher R. Dorr!
================================================
I hereby request you, Chris Dorr, to apologize honestly here in the
chess groups for another character assassination against me although I
was the __o n l y__ member of rgcc who attacked and criticised and
labelled the allegation as a fascist offence, the only one, --- that was
me. Please do correct your mistake and character assassination. Thank
you.
===============
>You simply
>*couldn't have missed them - you seemed very observant of these group when
>the chance to attack Bob presented itself! Not because you are some kind of
>'heroic defender of freedom' (or some such nonsense that you like to
>assert), but because you only cared about going after Bob.
>Just look at the (former) name of this thread. You were the first to condemn
>Bob for *anything*, but when Sean acts in a way far worse than Bob ever did,
>you do nothing.
As I proved above, you are lying. Period.
>You babble on about Bob and this and that...you obsess on him, but when Sean
>calls for all gays to be lined up and shot (his quote), you do nothing.
>You're pathetic.
Nope. I attacked Sean for the horrible allegation against you likewise I
attacked Bob for his idea of gasolining people, dismembering them and
sending _me_ personally to go and visit DrDeath Kevotrkian, a known
medical "killer" who's actually in jail for murder.
Don't you get it why I criticised Bob? Surely I didn't criticise his
brilliant computer chess stuff! I always declared that I admired Bob.
>These people have done nothing to you. If you are so ill that you actually
>believe the blather you spout, then I feel sorry for you. You start thing
>90+% of the time. You know it, I know it, and just about everyone here knows
>it.
Little dreamer. I don't wish my worst enemy to go under the same fire I
went through here when Mister Hyatt and his gang invited me to get
killed literally. You must be really blind for not seeing the scandal.
Likewise Bob Hyatt did send me to DrDeath Kevorkian, his German ftp
operator Herttrich advised me to visit the local vet (!!) for a final
overdosis. "Afterwards" he mentioned "away into the fabrique for
artificial fertilizer (where animal bodies are harvested)". I don't even
mention the other killer fantasies from anonymous and very famous
posters. Just this the author of STOBOR, Tom Kerrigan, actually working
for MicroSOFT, wanted to shoot my knees ...!!!
Nobody, I repeat, nobody here did criticise Mister Hyatt and his
associates for such incredible slander and inhuman thoughts against me.
>Do it yourself. For Sean's disgusting postings. The come back and say that
>Bob is somehow the worst poster here.
I'm sorry. I can't do it because it would be false and a lie. What
Mister Hyatt (an associate professor in Alabama) did was worse than what
Sean (a self-declared 12 y. old guy) wrote. Please get real and try to
win back a rest of logic. You seem to have lost all common sense if you
want to compare Bob with Sean. Bob, an old man with all the experience
and then Sean a young man ...
If you still can't understand why I'm so hurt and violated please
contact me via email and I will give you further details that are not
for public purposes. Again. Do contact me whenever you want. Take your
time for reconsideration. For me it would be fun to see you back and
then we could meet in computer chess threads.
But here in public let's stop this because you will never be able to
twist the history record in Dejas. :)
BTW how do you think about my idea to operate a Crafty on a CRAY in
Paderborn at the WCCC?
Niko Wellingk
[nothing worth quoting]
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sean
>
... I don't normally wish anyone to get hit by a truck,
but this is something different.
Why is it that a celebrity always get stalked by some
no-life? Must be jealousy or something. I will buy
"lack of brains" for an explanation, too.
--
Niko Wellingk n...@niksula.hut.fi
Rolf Tueschen
<s89ww03si...@leikkiauto.cs.hut.fi>:
>>
>> Sean
>>
>... I don't normally wish anyone to get hit by a truck,
>but this is something different.
Please don't post here your killer fantasies. This is 1) off-topic and
2) we already had it here with Mister Hyatt long enough. Hyatt normally
spoke of Greyhound buses and people who should be dismembered ...
We are fed up with such nonsense! Please stop it.
You can however call me by private email and I will supply you with
details about Mister Hyatt sending me to DrDeath Kevorkian, a medical
killer, who was just condemned for man slaughter in the USA. As a
European you don't want to get confused with such stuff, don't you?
>Why is it that a celebrity always get stalked by some
>no-life?
Also this inhuman characterization of a human being as 'some "low" or
"no" life' is something Mister Hyatt brought into the debate of a
computer chess group. Without further objections this was declared to be
a fascist terminology. Please try to get it that a "celebrity" in a
small field should normally focus his interest on exactly that field. If
the cebrity however goes rambling in politics, history and maybe
philosophy, it will become a fallacy by force. You don't need to forget
about Bob, the admired computer chess hero. But please pay attention if
the same person goes over the edge in extreme political hyperbole ...
>Must be jealousy or something. I will buy
>"lack of brains" for an explanation, too.
Basically you demonstrate your restricted ability to analyse such
difficult questions. You are somewhat _u n f a i r_ against Sean and his
opposition against impostordom and the like.
I wished we could close this debate, come back to computer chess and
hopefully -- some day -- Bob will come back to the group too. With such
drival you posted the chances that Bob will reconsider his tragic
decision will tend against zero.
So, let's start interesting computer chess debates, and Bob, your
'celebrity', will surely be invited back.
To start with, I would like to invite _you_ to give your comment to the
chess position I posted in my Computer Chess Misc (10). What do you
think who's right. Bob's CRAFTY or the famous FRITZ? What would you play
in the position?
For all here the position again:
Kg1 Qd2 Bf7 Pe5 g2 h2
Kc6 Ra8 Rd8 Bc8 Pa5 b7 d3
WTM
>--
>Niko Wellingk n...@niksula.hut.fi
Jeremiah Penery
> To start with, I would like to invite _you_ to give your comment to the
> chess position I posted in my Computer Chess Misc (10). What do you
> think who's right. Bob's CRAFTY or the famous FRITZ? What would you play
> in the position?
>
> For all here the position again:
>
> Kg1 Qd2 Bf7 Pe5 g2 h2
> Kc6 Ra8 Rd8 Bc8 Pa5 b7 d3
> WTM
So what do FRITZ and CRAFTY say? I was getting Qc3+, with a draw score
from Crafty.
el_jake
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7dihdj$6no$1...@news06.btx.dtag.de>...
CUT
>You can however call me by private email and I will supply you with
>details about Mister Hyatt sending me to DrDeath Kevorkian, a medical
>killer, who was just condemned for man slaughter in the USA. As a
>European you don't want to get confused with such stuff, don't you?
CUT
<offtopic><flame>
Please feel free to supply your email and phone number! But do it here
please.
- and please feel free to send your _alter ego's_ to Dr. Kevorkian.
You are a screwup Rolf. and has been for 3 yr. in this NG.
</flame></offtopic>
jake
CATSoft Software Solutions
Arsenault wrote:
> Yeah, but geez, these newsgroups are much too slow to read. What do we
> have to do to get a moderated newsgroup?
You have to follow the rules. If there is enough response for it, then
it will be provided.
The problem with a moderated newsgroup is finding the moderator - it is
an hard job believe you me!
The alternative is a mailing list.
I have got software which will run a mailing list, in fact I run a
couple already. I tend to leave them unmoderated BUT I can bar
anyone if I so wish.
Leonardo
bewildered by the cobwebs of irrelevance that clutter the postings.
I would also like to implore Robert Hyatt to hang around as his on-topic
posts are exactly what I hoped to find and are the sort of information
and feedback that ONLY the Usenet groups can provide for people like me
who are investigating a new area.
I have no idea what of the history behind the the ramblings I have read
here or what associated aggravation they have caused. An unfortunate
side-effect of the freedom of speech and easy availability provided by
the internet is that the noise ratio increases dramatically - both in
Usenet groups and in WWW pages. However with the increasing
sophistication of news reader software and the filtering and viewing
features they offer I have found it 'relatively' easy to remove the
persistent postings of mangled minds from most of the Usenet groups I
access. This is much harder (and slower) to do with Web searching etc.
So - as part of the fight to keep the Usenet groups alive - I would
(selfishly) ask Bob Hyatt to stick around as the 'victory(?)' of the
three witches does harm to the whole internet kingdom.
In article <36FB63D7...@aol.com>, NPZ...@aol.com says...
> I've been around in this group only for a few months, so I don't know
> all the things that have happened here in the past. I read some of these
> pro and anti Hyatt posts and found some of them entertaining for a
> while, but couldn't figure out what was going on other than that
> apparently some people had a problem with you for some reason. When I
> read your posts here, however, I always found them to be helpful and
> informative, and frankly, it's not very difficult to skip stuff in a
> newsgroup that I'm not interested in, which is why I think unmoderated
> forums can work well. I always read your posts, in any case, and if you
> jump the boat now, I'll respect your decision, of course, and wish you
> the best, but I sure am disappointed about it and will miss your posts.
> A lot. No chance that you change your mind?
> Take care
> Cheerio
>
--
Fighting to make the world
a safer place for reality.
Rolf Tueschen
>Rolf Tueschen wrote:
Excuse me, Jeremiah. I have thought that people would then go into the
other thread. Her I repeat the text of my former post:
Please note that it's part of a real game I once played. The question
was not for the first move, but the second. Of course I have played
e5-e6 and not Qc3. But possibly it leads only to the same line by
another moving order. Two aspects of the question. The objective best
continuation and the possibly best solution for computers.
1.e6 Rd6 -1.44 (6/23) the value is from an older Fritz
[1...Bxe6 was the game; I think it's typical that a human player prefers
to get rid of that terrible threat; I won that game]
2.e7 Crafty and Junior4.6 a tempo
{So let me repeat the main question here for you. Who is right in your
opinion. Is it better to directly play e7 or could White also transpose
with a Q check?}
[2.Qc1+ Fritz5.32 needs 48'' to see e7]
2...Bd7 3.Qc3+
[3.Qc1+ fr4 8.1 3...Kb6 4.Qb2+ Ka6 5.Qa3 Rf6 6.Qc3 Rh6 7.Qxd3+ Bb5 8.Qe3
Rhh8±]
3...Kb6 4.Qe5 Kc7
[Crafty 16.5: 4...Rc6 5.e8Q Bxe8 6.Bxe8 Rc1+ 7.Kf2 Rc2+ 8.Kf3 d2 9.Qd6+
Ka7 10.Ba4 Rf8+ 11.Ke4 1.11/9]
5.e8Q Bxe8 6.Bxe8 soweit die alte Var; Crafty sees immediately the draw
6...Rxe8 7.Qxe8 d2 Crafty = (Also here Crafty seems to know how strong
such a free pawn can be.)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
° What do you think. Is Rd6 a draw or more?
° What do you think. Is e7 the best move for White?
Rolf Tueschen
<7dimqs$sr2$1...@news.inet.tele.dk>:
>Please feel free to supply your email and phone number! But do it here
>please.
Already done in the header above.
>- and please feel free to send your _alter ego's_ to Dr. Kevorkian.
"El" WHAT?? Would you mind to give me _your_ real name and home
adress? I will then try to contact you before I try to contact the one
you proposed. Let's see if you are a coward or a real man.
>You are a screwup Rolf. and has been for 3 yr. in this NG.
Nonsense! I'm not even _here_ for 3 years. What a loser ...!
Rolf Tueschen
<MPG.116713326...@news.supernews.co.uk>:
>So - as part of the fight to keep the Usenet groups alive - I would
>(selfishly) ask Bob Hyatt to stick around as the 'victory(?)' of the
>three witches does harm to the whole internet kingdom.
Is it true that you are man enough to stand with your full name behind
the statement above? Feel free to email me your name and adress. I will
then try to contact you with details about the one you are pitying here.
el_jake
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7dj2ke$af8$2...@news01.btx.dtag.de>...
<off topic again>
One wonder, who's the real loser?!
My _real_ name is Jacob Lindquist i live in copenhagen.
You can reach me at ja...@programmer.net or call me +4540422156
I work for an ISP doing research in TCP protocol standards.
My hobby is computer chess, and I understand that your hobby is anoying
other people.
Is there more your anoying Rolf personalities whould like to know ?
I did a search in our records, and made a match with deja.
It's amazing how much off topic You are Rolf, you whould not last long in a
moderated group.
/jake
Leonardo
Unfortunately I must decline your invitation to exchange e-mails.
I appreciate that you are not contributing further to the ridiculously
personal nature of some of the correspondence I have seen here and are -
quite properly - taking off-topic personal discussions out of the
newsgroup and into personal one-to-one communication.
However I joined this newsgroup to find-out and discuss computer chess and
I am not interested in unsolicited personal details of anyone who
contributes here.
The only reason that I am replying in the newsgroup at all is that, when I
first posted my message, I /almost/ included a comment along the lines of:
'I am posting anonymously so that I don't unwittingly get ensnared in a
time-wasting debate.'
but I left it out as I didn't think it necessary.
I believe the only way to keep Usenet groups focussed is not to respond to
off-topic discussions. In case anyone else wants to talk about anything
other than this newsgroup or its subject I am just letting them know that
I will be ignoring anything off-topic.
Thanks again.
In article <7dj2qg$af8$3...@news01.btx.dtag.de>,
TUESCHEN.MEDIZ...@t-online.de (Rolf Tueschen) wrote:
Rolf Tueschen
<memo.19990327...@miket.compulink.co.uk>:
>Thanks for your response Rolf.
[..]
>I believe the only way to keep Usenet groups focussed is not to respond to
>off-topic discussions. In case anyone else wants to talk about anything
>other than this newsgroup or its subject I am just letting them know that
>I will be ignoring anything off-topic.
This is a good answer. I'm also not too much interested in email
exchanges. precisesly I must admit that generally I refuse to even
answer anonymous emails. The main reason for me is that email is for me
much more personal. And most of the time I think an exchange couldn't
lead very far with people who are so unequal in their education and
experience. Here in public I like to behave different.
Let me shortly react on your paragraphe above. The only one I quoted.
You made a strong point. By definition, if people followed that rule,
there would be no longer flame wars or off-topics. I agree with you.
I expected domething like this when I began to read the group two years
ago. But I could show you the topics that led automatically to
off-topics. BTW that's the reason why I still think that this group
should be divided into a pure technical cc section for programmers and
testers. AND likewise a section that could contain also meta debates and
politically relevant computer chess aspects. Psychological questions
about the behavour of programmers or operators, about cheating etc. pp.
Or let me put it this way. If we all would agree that both sections have
their originary justification then we could tolerate the two sections in
one group. I think with a little letter in front of the subject lines we
could roughly pre-define the belonging to the sections. Then the pure
techno experts have their safe area. Of course it made no sense to even
go slightly off-topic in such threads. I think the letter 'T' could
stand for Technical. And the letter 'M' for Misc. What do you think out
there?
But let me shortly come back to the reason why it went so wrong for two
years. It's because some of our best guys (The SSDF group, Ed Schroder
and now Bob Hyatt) thought that _THEY_ had a special right to talk about
what they wanted without being criticised at all.
Please note that I for one could NEVER have criticisesd Bob for some
bitmaps related stuff. How in hell could I have done that?
But note this. I know a lot about statistics, about methodology and
science. Now, after years of reading the SSDF in mags, I could finally
show here some of my points of critic. That was taken as a personal
offence by he guys. Totally false of course. But I admit that a sudden
critic can hurt exactly because it's seen as correct and justified. But
they preferred to scapegoat me as a newbie that I was, but they forgot
that I was an expert in such questions they dealt with in their
amateur-like style. By force that had consequences on both sides.
I must shorten the review. Let me skip Ed for this time. We had a lot of
misunderstandings exactly due to too intimate exchanges via email (!!),
so I fully agree with your statement above. Sorry. That one I had
deleted. :)
But finally take Bob. I was struck when I read him preach about
gasolining people ... And with that moment my involvement here was
predefined. Because Bob falsely thought that he could talk about such
stuff but the critic could only be jusified if it came from a programmer
collegue. But even Chris Whittington who made a similar critic to mine,
was not accepted. Well, as a psychologist I saw more and more tendencies
of 'primadonna' complexes. "Don't touch me, I'm an expert!"
But this is totally in opposition to the usenet!
And suddenly the newbie in computer chess who had played a thousand
games against his programs and machines, became also a political writer
against such inhumanities that were posted here in full understanding
that they were off-topic. But the experts thought they could do it.
Perhaps Bob is right. With his departure (hopefully only for a short
time) a break could been marked. Let's come back to computer chess. And
to serve this let's directly open the two sections. And let's see if
people are decent enough to respect the two speres. I for one would
possible only ask a humble question at times in the T section. But all
the misc in M should also have a right to live. Of course the people who
only are interested in techno stuff should skip or filter the whole M
section. I think that we all could work together this way in fairness
and hopefully respect and if possible in friendship.
How about it?
P.S. For all this it would be a real relief if people like Hyatt would
at least confess that they realised that their off-topics possible gave
the reason for much too much off-topics from all sides. But actually Bob
is still thinking that he for one did NEVER start anything off-topic or
horrible. Just in his recent posts in CCC he declared that he only
reacted in kind (!! sic) if another poster had attacked him perhaps 30
times before. That's absolutely crazy if you take into consideration
that Bob constantly reacted to the most follish nonsense. As if he had a
babysitter function here in the group. Experts like Bob should be role
models. And in fact they are nilly whilly. So, it would be good if he
came back and showed the many young members that he really liked his
field and all those who are intrerested. EVEN people like "Sean" or
yours truly. My contributions here to computer chess go into several
hundreds, I haven't counted them yet. But like Phil or also Chris W. I'm
by nature interested in the more meta stuff of computer chess. The real
techno side is hopelessly lost for me. For several reasons. But that
would be for email again. :)
Could someone like you start the concrete construction of the two
sections here? Please.
In these times of WAR let us set an example of PEACE!
Rolf Tueschen
<7dj7im$ijl$1...@news.inet.tele.dk>:
Thanks for your data. I hope I will use it with care in the question of
your inspiration that people shoukd go and visit DrDeath Kevorkian who
just was convicted as a killer in Pontiac(sp?) USA. I can only hope that
the Danish Law allows you to propagate such ill-minded ideas.
For a computer chess group it seems to be a little bit off-topic,
methinks. As for me living in a moderated group. I did it already. No
problems at all. You should note that if _nobody_ talks about gasolining
people or sending them to DrDeath Kevorkian, that was it what Mister
Hyatt, the great computer chess expert did, then I had never had the
idea to criticise such a wrong-doing. Know what I mean?
As to your pretention that you are a computer chess interested, how come
that you did never post here about computer chess. While you think that
I am surely NOT interested in cc may I direct your attention to my
recent threat Compouterchess Misc (10)? Please also note that the
number 10 speaks for 9 former threads with each dozens of follow-up
posts. Could it be that you are confusing me with someone? With
yourself? My record about computer chess is quite normal for an active
chessplayer and computer chess user. Also note that I do play the
programs myself. I don't just let them play against each other ...
Also I want to remind you of hundreds of posts I exchanged with Bob
about computer chess. Not the technical details of course but meta
questions. Finally I also use his CRAFTY program. My first game against
CRAFTY I dedicated especially with many thanks ansd admiration to Bob
Hyatt! (But all that can't change my belief that between collegues or
friends it must be possible, no, it must be a duty, to warn and
criticise the other if he goes over the edge. That was it what I did.
Nothing more nothing less. And I still haven't changed my opinion about
the marvelous cc expert Hyatt. Period.)
Perhaps all the information could influence you in your judgement.
Not that you might change your negative impression of me, but please try
to foundate it on facts and NOT fantasies.
Again, my number and adress is above.
>/jake
Isofarro
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7djfc6$c45$1...@news05.btx.dtag.de>...
<snip>
>For a computer chess group it seems to be a little bit off-topic,
>methinks. As for me living in a moderated group. I did it already. No
>problems at all.
Rolf, thanks for your thoughts. I was sceptical that you would not want this
newsgroup to be a moderated one. I'm grateful you have proved me wrong.
I think we are both a bit fed up of these off-post topics.
Lets make this newsgroup work.
Mike
Rolf Tueschen
<7djhib$qrq$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>Mike
Absolutely, thanks.
The question is if my idea can work if we make two sections. One where
all posts have a
- T - in front of the subject
that's the technical, programmers, testers section. If you want the
serious one. A bit like CCC as it was planned, not as it's now, where
Bob is allowed to call people idiots who did nothing but post their
opinions -- without dirty words at all. I mean the Charles Unruh post.
The only thing he did was give an extrem view about Bob's consequences.
I mean the consequences his posts had on others.
And a
- M - in front of
that's the Misc group. It's more planned for meta debates. Please, NOT
flames or such. Not wars. But there are wuestions that call for a
serious debate, that are truly on-topic but still enerving for those who
are primarily interested in the techno stuff.
It would be a good sign if we agreed that Bob, who once propagated
gasolining would also be off-topic in the planned M section.
The main advantage would be a possibility to quickly be able to filter
or skip the section you are not interested in. Of course people also
could subscribe to M but in detail skip or filter posts from Rolf. All
that should be possible.
In the end I think this should work and should save the truly usenet
style. But I wouldn't bother if the - T - section should be moderated
for the sake of water proof safety ...
What do you and all think?
I agree we must somehow end the bad off-topics. I'm sure the substantial
powers of our members will prove me right. ;)
Isofarro
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7djir5$nef$1...@news08.btx.dtag.de>...
>The question is if my idea can work if we make two sections. One where
>all posts have a
>
> - T - in front of the subject
>
>that's the technical, programmers, testers section. If you want the
>serious one. A bit like CCC as it was planned, not as it's now,
- rec.games.chess.computer.technical
- rec.games.chess.computer.misc
would be more appropriate there. I do agree with you, and naturally makes
sense to have a definitive split.
>where
>Bob is allowed to call people idiots who did nothing but post their
>opinions -- without dirty words at all. I mean the Charles Unruh post.
>The only thing he did was give an extrem view about Bob's consequences.
>I mean the consequences his posts had on others.
Let's not single out people here. Mistakes were made by a few people. The
damage has been done. Some people said a few things they later regret, and
some (including myself) were not inclined to do something positive to
rectify things, and consequently we are such a mess now. That is my one
regret.
Forget the past. As the Russian school of chess say about a position
"Evaluate the position not by what pieces have left the board, but with the
strength of pieces still on."
>And a
>
> - M - in front of
>
>that's the Misc group. It's more planned for meta debates. Please, NOT
>flames or such. Not wars. But there are wuestions that call for a
>serious debate, that are truly on-topic but still enerving for those who
>are primarily interested in the techno stuff.
That's where a moderated newsgroup would help out, by filtering out these
annoying flames so we are left with pure content.
>It would be a good sign if we agreed that Bob, <snipped - unnecessary>
would also be off-topic in the >planned M section.
Such replies would be filtered my moderation?
>The main advantage would be a possibility to quickly be able to filter
>or skip the section you are not interested in. Of course people also
>could subscribe to M but in detail skip or filter posts from Rolf. All
>that should be possible.
Yes. good point - we do agree there.
>In the end I think this should work and should save the truly usenet
>style. But I wouldn't bother if the - T - section should be moderated
>for the sake of water proof safety ...
Two newsgroups (one for technical and one for misc) would naturally
accomplish this.
>What do you and all think?
Some very good ideas, and a basis to start from.
The main question is, are you (along with the rest of the group and me)
willing to take the time to vote on such an action?
>I agree we must somehow end the bad off-topics. I'm sure the substantial
>powers of our members will prove me right. ;)
There will be a lot of agreement on this.
Mike.
Rolf Tueschen
<7djkhf$t12$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>Sounds a good idea - but maybe a split of r.g.c.c into
> - rec.games.chess.computer.technical
> - rec.games.chess.computer.misc
>would be more appropriate there. I do agree with you, and naturally makes
>sense to have a definitive split.
You might be right. But my idea was a very simple one. Actually we don't
have two splitted groups. So, my question was, why not give it a try
with the - T- and - M - in the subject lines. Let's see if people can
profit from the separation. If it works the need to have a total split
could be saved.
I have the following in mind. look, I think for very special reasons,
that the computer chess community is much more little than the chess
one. It could be a little joke to finally have a group exclusively for
some 20 - 30 experts. But many experts and the normal members anyway
will likeely take part in - M -. But that's my idea or opinion. perhaps
it's bull.
~~~~~~~~
Let me end with a little psycho demarche. You wrote, surely with good
intentions, that we should not exclude certain names. I can only agree
with you. But perhaps you are unaware of the fact that the whole war
here for two years was about some people who wanted to exterminate, yes,
virtually kill me. And also kill me in reality outside. I knew already
at the beginning that an expert like Bob hyatt couldn't win that war.
Now he behaves like a sissy that has lost his remarkable toys. Please
try to understand the mess. Only because some inspired and talented guy
took the free source of CRAFTY and included perfectly the original Bob
sayings (really, all original Bob sayings, just take a look yourself)
and suddenly Bob feels betrayed and humiliated. What a scandal!
But when he wanted to sent me to that medical killer who is just
convicted for man slaughter in Pontiac(sp?) Bob felt no remorse. Where
were my rights, where were my dignity as a human being?
Two things that don't fit together. Here Bob's sadness about his own
words in his baby and there my concern as being humiliated as a human
being. Don't you think that this cried for apologies before we could
begin a new perod? -- Just a thought. But the past few days people gave
the impression as if Bob was really victimized. When in reality he's a
leading actor for the whole two years ...
Isofarro
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7djm0j$3or$1...@news02.btx.dtag.de>...
>"Isofarro" <mi...@isofarro.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
><7djkhf$t12$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>
>
>>Sounds a good idea - but maybe a split of r.g.c.c into
>> - rec.games.chess.computer.technical
>> - rec.games.chess.computer.misc
>>would be more appropriate there. I do agree with you, and naturally makes
>>sense to have a definitive split.
>
>
>You might be right. But my idea was a very simple one. Actually we don't
>have two splitted groups. So, my question was, why not give it a try
>with the - T- and - M - in the subject lines. Let's see if people can
>profit from the separation. If it works the need to have a total split
>could be saved.
I like the idea. You are right, it saves splitting up the group. Shall we
see what the rest of the group think of this too?
>I have the following in mind. look, I think for very special reasons,
>that the computer chess community is much more little than the chess
>one. It could be a little joke to finally have a group exclusively for
>some 20 - 30 experts. But many experts and the normal members anyway
>will likeely take part in - M -. But that's my idea or opinion.
Yes, the experts will also take part in some of the - M - threads, and
fully in the - T - threads. There's no problem if only 20-30 experts (you
mean expert programmers?) take part in one group - the content will be very
appropriate to their needs, but not to us playing against their programs.
The experts need a say if they'd prefer to split the groups or not.
>
>
> ~~~~~~~~
>
>
>Let me end with a little psycho demarche. You wrote, surely with good
>intentions, that we should not exclude certain names. I can only agree
>with you. But perhaps you are unaware of the fact that the whole war
>here for two years was about some people who wanted to exterminate, yes,
>virtually kill me.
I am painfully aware of this - although not aware it has been for over two
years. I could have tried to do something positive some months ago when I
came back to this newsgroup. But I was an idiot and watched it disintegrate.
I see the distinct need to filter out such posts - from all parties. There
is no reason for it.
>Only because some inspired and talented guy
>took the free source of CRAFTY and included perfectly the original Bob
>sayings (really, all original Bob sayings, just take a look yourself)
>and suddenly Bob feels betrayed and humiliated. What a scandal!
To be honest with you, although it took some programming skill, I found the
concept tasteless, bordering on vulgar. I used to pull such pranks in high
school. Wouldn't it have been appropriate to insert chess quotations like
"Whoops, there goes your king!" which then brings crafty to a wider
chess-learning audience?
>But when he wanted to sent me to that medical killer who is just
>convicted for man slaughter in Pontiac(sp?) Bob felt no remorse. Where
>were my rights, where were my dignity as a human being?
Yes, words have a powerful and distresing effect. I cannot comment on these
statements. I need to remain objective and unbiased - and positive that we
can undo the damages caused. Yes, you have been victimised too - I am amazed
at your patience in staying. I'm sorry this has happened - and we do need to
guard against it ever happening again. Are you with me in filtering out such
remarks? They do not belong in a news group called rec.games.chess.computer.
Thanks
Mike
Phil Innes
Please feel free to supply your email and phone number! But do it here
please.
You are a screwup Rolf. and has been for 3 yr. in this NG.
</flame></offtopic>
Enough of this.
Kevorkian is convicted of Murder today.
Bombs are dropping in Europe.
But this is Chess! A game.
Perhaps we all get a bit emotional about our enthusiasms
sometimes, but please - you cannot complain about other people
when you, yourself, post death-fantasies.
Where are you at? This is the perpetual mystery of rgcc - its
like some sort of *hysteria* in case someone says anything
against the electrical box on the desk, and all the work put
into it...
This is no excuse for such violent emotions! If the box has a
value, then we can examine it, can't we? And ultimately we
must examine it in chess terms. Otherwise this entire group
may as well remove itself to alt.chess.fantasy.abstraction
because it has nothing whatsoever to do with chess.
Not only does chess need to be honored as the central subject
of this thread - but program enthusiasts, in particular, could
learn something from critique when it is offered.
The defensiveness of the programming community is not a sign
of strength, but of weakness. This is why computer-chess is a
sideline to worldchess, and unintegrated with it.
Now that Bob has gone there is a need to think for yourself
about issues - and although it is very difficult to proceed
without a leader, there has been an over-dependence on him,
-he was in a sort of prison of his own success- and, an
unfortunate as it is, his absense from this ng may have the
benefit of allowing its members to actually discuss issues in
more detail than:
-Realy Kul Bob
-Get to Kevorkian, Rolf
which is not much above grunting, is it?
Phil Innes
Phil Innes
two
years. I could have tried to do something positive some months ago when
I
came back to this newsgroup. But I was an idiot and watched it
disintegrate.
I see the distinct need to filter out such posts - from all parties.
There
is no reason for it.
Hi "Isofarro"
I have enjoyed your recent posts here. You actually have an
interesting, original and open exchange on this ng. I hope it
does not seem patronizing when I say "congratulations!" - and
better to say this first because I am about to disagree with
your statement quoted above ; )
I hope you do not consider this a meaningless difference, but
may I say that when you remark "there is no reason for it" you
could be in error?
Perhaps the reason is not logical.
It is my observation that the looser the newsgroup - that is,
the more varied and liberal - the less flame und-angst-mit,
there is. The more you can chat on some side-line
conversation, the easier it is to approach another poster,
because you have some guide of how to speak with him. Some
sort of mutual code, and thereby, less angry
misunderstandings, and so on.
I am rambling as usual. Phil
Rolf Tueschen
differentiate the post with posts about more technical topics that
should bear a - T - in the subject line. Just a try to help people to
enjoy the group without having to read all through long threads if they
are only interested in techno computer chess. What do you think,
dear reader?
=================================================
"Isofarro" <mi...@isofarro.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
<7djo2s$vsl$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>I like the idea. You are right, it saves splitting up the group. Shall we
>see what the rest of the group think of this too?
Why not start right away? It's not my concept to ask people if I were
allowed to to this or that. I'm following the concept that I must have
good reasons myself to do this or that. All we two who discussed this in
a somewhat hidden threat with a false subject line should do is starting
right away. So I will start by imputing the label to this new post. Just
now I made the - M - label. NB that we should add two "-" for reasons of
being sorted out from mere Ms in normal words. The in-between gap should
also be included. I don't know the term for this 'nothing'.
>>I have the following in mind. look, I think for very special reasons,
>>that the computer chess community is much more little than the chess
>>one. It could be a little joke to finally have a group exclusively for
>>some 20 - 30 experts. But many experts and the normal members anyway
>>will likeely take part in - M -. But that's my idea or opinion.
>Yes, the experts will also take part in some of the - M - threads, and
>fully in the - T - threads. There's no problem if only 20-30 experts (you
>mean expert programmers?) take part in one group - the content will be very
>appropriate to their needs, but not to us playing against their programs.
>The experts need a say if they'd prefer to split the groups or not.
Experts are for me
-- programmers by definition, but only if they talk about
their field techno in computer chess
-- testers of software
-- operators of programs
-- organizers of tournaments
-- academics with knowledge in fields of computer science
All these experts should talk on a very high level. But if it comes to
meta debates, as it happened even on CCC, also now, e.g. about the
question why and that Bob did retire from rgcc, that would be clearly a
topic for - M -.
Note that everybody could write in - T -, but newbies probably could
only ask questions and give a report from some own experience with a
certain soft- or hardware. Newbies who think they should debate about
the status of programmer primadonnas e.g. should do that in - M - and
surely NOT in - T -.
>>Let me end with a little psycho demarche. You wrote, surely with good
>>intentions, that we should not exclude certain names. I can only agree
>>with you. But perhaps you are unaware of the fact that the whole war
>>here for two years was about some people who wanted to exterminate, yes,
>>virtually kill me.
>I am painfully aware of this - although not aware it has been for over two
>years. I could have tried to do something positive some months ago when I
>came back to this newsgroup. But I was an idiot and watched it disintegrate.
>I see the distinct need to filter out such posts - from all parties. There
>is no reason for it.
Don't you take too much responsablities on your shoulders. Those who
took part in the war are responsible. Nobody else. Honestly what I
surely missed in the past was the communication via email with smart
thinkers like you. I'm sure that I could have done many things different
too. A lawyer in Germany told me, after he had read some of Bob's stuff,
I mean the off-topics, that it would be a waste of time to hope to
resocialize such a man. This would go so deep into personality
departments that one could not expect to influence him. He may be right
because even Bruce Moreland was unable to influence Bob although he also
spoke to him on the phone at least once in a week ...
Well, my position was and still is that people of Bob's intelligence
must be able to understand that usenet and the virtual reality would
always mean that 100% perfect or any such "total" thoughts would be
nonsense. Because if in real life people need already good definitions
to talk about difficult topics, the talks in usenet should better leave
out all such "total" thoughts. For instance is it a scandal to support a
somewhat provincial attitude in an international community. This is the
biggest question I have for Bob. How could he think that his ancient
opinions from the forests of Alabama could interest the international
group? You should know that NOBODY forced Bob to begin his lessons about
the death penalty and then going deeper the details of gasolining and
harvesting the organs ...
Internationally Bob is simply an uneducated backwoodsman or as my dic
said for the American language, he's more or less a 'hick'. And Bob did
never understand that it was never the question if he had the right to
post such things. Of course he had the right to say whatever he wanted.
But not into an international group, NOT into an group for computer
chess! Isn't it trivial?
The same with his trick of a hick to label me exactly with what I had
criticised the most in the past. That's simply NOT state of the art in
internationa discussions. Know what I mean?
>>Only because some inspired and talented guy
>>took the free source of CRAFTY and included perfectly the original Bob
>>sayings (really, all original Bob sayings, just take a look yourself)
>>and suddenly Bob feels betrayed and humiliated. What a scandal!
>To be honest with you, although it took some programming skill, I found the
>concept tasteless, bordering on vulgar. I used to pull such pranks in high
>school.
Excuse me. I think I could n't make clear my point. And your rections
makes no sense. because did you find in school such wordings Bob hyatt
had uttered here in rgcc??? I doubt that. Of course any school mag has
the usual quotings from teachers, and many a funny stuff is been
collected there. But show me a single school mag with such a language
this professor was famous for. It's the unbelievably inhuman approach
that stood behind his wordings. Look, he called me a low species of
life, far away, far below the human race. Does here a bell ring for you?
This is so utterly wrong and inhuman that we don't need to waste our
time here, no? Don't you agree? And I tell you, as a psychologist that I
still have respect for the good sides in Bob. His knowledge in computer
chess must be outstanding. But Bob did pay a high price. he did never
grow up. He's surely not an intellectual. It always gave me the rest
when he gave his 'ditto' performance.
But you gave me a really nice analogy. Look, when I was 13 years old I
lay in a sanatory for many many months and I had the opportunity to
debate in French as a German about God and the World. I made a few notes
at the time in my books. And all I can say that I must have had the same
style of debating Bob still follows truly with his 50 years. For a too
long time I always thought that Bob was just playing a game. I thought
that he wanted to inspire the debate with his extremist views and
arguing tricks. basically I took him as devil's advocate. And I must
confess, although it was due to the typically virtual reality
confusions, that I should have stopped the opposition against such a
nonsense much earlier.
Only this final steps showed me how wrong Bob was all the time. When I
read Sean's genial motto "attack, deny, reject, attack on a different
topic" I still didn't believe it. But now, after Bob had always told us
that he would simply sue the Hyatt Watch people, that even the
university's lawyer was already involved, and now this empty explanation
that too many now would hunt him on the net ...
>Wouldn't it have been appropriate to insert chess quotations like
>"Whoops, there goes your king!" which then brings crafty to a wider
>chess-learning audience?
You make me smile. It's as if you said that Bob should be wisely
following a different agenda with a different vocabulary here in rgcc.
But that was the style and the words Bob used here against innocent
members of rgcc. And my point was in the former post thsat even on CCC
Bob continues to use it. Without protest from the moderators. But they
quickly deleted the post by 'Unruh' that contained NO, absolutely no
dirty expression. But Bob directly labeled the guy as an 'idiot'. Ok,
the moderators deleted all the thread. But Bob was the actor and not at
all the victim. And I have serious suspicion that Bob will ever be able
to moderate his output. Methinks the best we could do is to construct a
purely techno section where Bob can demonstrate his great wisdom on
computer chess. But beware to think that he should also take part in the
Misc section. A single anonymous who let a red hering into the water
would invite Bob again to go over the edge. Bob deliberately and
literally said that this is how it all began. Completely ignoring that
it's a real weakness of an expert or grown-up to take offence by such
games. Bob is, as I said, still the young Bobby he once told us was in
war with a Billy boy. And it went into a real boxing fight although
Billy was much stronger. But afterwards they were friends. Bob
completely forgot that his marvelous talents alone would give him more
friends than all his Rambo attitudes. -- You see me a little bit, or
better, a great bit, confused. Because it's simply not possible to
really judge someone alone on the base of the usenet output.
I think hypotheses are allowed but we will never have certainty.
>>But when he wanted to sent me to that medical killer who is just
>>convicted for man slaughter in Pontiac(sp?) Bob felt no remorse. Where
>>were my rights, where were my dignity as a human being?
>Yes, words have a powerful and distresing effect. I cannot comment on these
>statements. I need to remain objective and unbiased -
Thank you! But the silent and strong way you make your statements is
already like a little waterfall of sprinkling water in the mountains.
It'Äs so refreshing to see you react with so much sensitivity on my
cries.
>and positive that we
>can undo the damages caused. Yes, you have been victimised too - I am amazed
>at your patience in staying.
It's just a question of replacement as a psychologist. And much more,
but that would be too private to talk about here in public. I always
wondered that nobody had thought about much earlier. What I can do is
primitively excuse myself for being forced to stay in a hobby that
accompanied me all my life. I wished so strongly that I had a choice to
switch into other interesting hobbies and sports ...
But let me honestly confess that these talks here, these relationships,
although only virtual, had such a positive influence on my real life,
that I would even thank Bob for his otherwise totally wrong opposition.
But again, all that is not for public declarations. Let me say it this
way. I could read the Human Comedy in BALZAC. And I did. But this here
on the net is better in our modern times. But of course experience helps
to understand this medium and its actors.
> I'm sorry this has happened - and we do need to
>guard against it ever happening again. Are you with me in filtering out such
>remarks? They do not belong in a news group called rec.games.chess.computer.
ABSOLUTELY. However psycholgy has proven that the best education is the
good role modelling by the adults. Here one could say by the famous
ones. If they fail I'm sure that rules alones can't save a good and
inspiring atmosphere. Look at 'Fernando' in CCC. Wghat a waste of
talents -- for what? I would sleep and live much better if I had such a
man (?) here in this forum. Sorry for the ?, but you can never be sure
on the net.
hey, perhaps you are right. perhaps you are really guilty for having
stayed away although you observed what went wrong. But believe me this.
Apart from some anonymous writers nobody had the guts to oppose Bob. And
you are also not known with your real name. Not that it would matter.
But I think that Bob would have stopped much earlier if some decent
comments had been made. I don't understand why nobody in CCC now opposes
Bob when he starts talking about "idiots".
Thank you a lot. From my side I want to signal you that I don't need
further continuations from your side. Perhaps that would spoil your
neutral position. But you can count me among those who want to support
the end of such off-topics.
>Thanks
>Mike
No, I have to thank you!
Jeremiah Penery
>
> Just a short remark about that - M - in the header. It should
> differentiate the post with posts about more technical topics that
> should bear a - T - in the subject line. Just a try to help people to
> enjoy the group without having to read all through long threads if they
> are only interested in techno computer chess. What do you think,
> dear reader?
One thing I have seen in another group is prefacing the subject line
with TAN: to signify that the thread is tangential to the topic of the
newsgroup. It seems to work quite well there.
Jeremiah
Charles Milton Ling
> Rolf Tueschen wrote:
> >
> > Just a short remark about that - M - in the header. It should
> > differentiate the post with posts about more technical topics that
> > should bear a - T - in the subject line. Just a try to help people to
> > enjoy the group without having to read all through long threads if they
> > are only interested in techno computer chess. What do you think,
> > dear reader?
>
> One thing I have seen in another group is prefacing the subject line
> with TAN: to signify that the thread is tangential to the topic of the
> newsgroup. It seems to work quite well there.
>
> Jeremiah
I have also seen TID - thread is deteriorating. Doesn't mean that nonsense
only is going on, just that focus is lost.
Charley
Todd Durham
Rolf Tueschen wrote:
> "Isofarro" <mi...@isofarro.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
> <7djhib$qrq$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>
> >Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7djfc6$c45$1...@news05.btx.dtag.de>...
> ><snip>
>
> >>For a computer chess group it seems to be a little bit off-topic,
> >>methinks. As for me living in a moderated group. I did it already. No
> >>problems at all.
>
> >Rolf, thanks for your thoughts. I was sceptical that you would not want this
> >newsgroup to be a moderated one. I'm grateful you have proved me wrong.
>
> >I think we are both a bit fed up of these off-post topics.
>
> >Lets make this newsgroup work.
>
> >Mike
>
> Absolutely, thanks.
>
> The question is if my idea can work if we make two sections. One where
> all posts have a
>
> - T - in front of the subject
>
> that's the technical, programmers, testers section. If you want the
> serious one. A bit like CCC as it was planned, not as it's now, where
> Bob is allowed to call people idiots who did nothing but post their
> opinions -- without dirty words at all. I mean the Charles Unruh post.
> The only thing he did was give an extrem view about Bob's consequences.
> I mean the consequences his posts had on others.
Rolf,
Perhaps you did not see it, but Mr. Unruh (whom I suspect is someone else using
an alias) posted a second, and very nasty, post that was taken off CCC after
about 1/2 an hour on the site. It was something about "Hyatt's Top Ten Bronies
ast CCC". It was quite clearly a personal attack directed at Hyatt and the ten
listed. I was one of those unfortunate to have read it while it was posted, but
it was trhere. Also quite clear was that the original post was a VERY thinly
veiled personal attack. Mr. Unruh (and I doubt that's his real name) had nothing
useful to contribute.
Isofarro
Phil Innes wrote in message <36FD9090...@sover.net>...
> Hi "Isofarro"
>
> I have enjoyed your recent posts here. You actually have an
> interesting, original and open exchange on this ng. I hope it
> does not seem patronizing when I say "congratulations!" - and
> better to say this first because I am about to disagree with
> your statement quoted above ; )
Thanks, this is what can be achieved with some moderation (though, I admit,
at the moment it is self-moderation).
> I hope you do not consider this a meaningless difference, but
> may I say that when you remark "there is no reason for it" you
> could be in error?
>
> Perhaps the reason is not logical.
The reasons may or may not be logical, I don't think its wise for me to be
drawn into commenting here. My sole criteria is of content (rich content
makes a newsgroup?). Take away such 'unreasonable' remarks out of the forum
and we are left with two types of postings:
* One with content
* One empty.
The sad thing is, which is almost always the case, when people are attacked
the true content of a posting is ignored, and only the ugly stuff is seen.
Lets limit correspondence to content (we already have an alt.flame newsgroup
*grin*).
> It is my observation that the looser the newsgroup - that is,
> the more varied and liberal - the less flame und-angst-mit,
> there is. The more you can chat on some side-line
> conversation, the easier it is to approach another poster,
> because you have some guide of how to speak with him. Some
> sort of mutual code, and thereby, less angry
> misunderstandings, and so on.
Yes, I've seen it happen to. I'm not advocating total censorship here, but
only a process where someone (titled a moderator) can step in like a referee
and remove virulent and aggressive articles so the rest of the group can
concentrate on computer chess. The moderator-to-be needs to be as liberal as
they come, else we start losing the content - I think CCC is a class example
of correct moderation, from what I've seen. They reacted as quickly as they
could in removing unwanted postings.
Yes, good point, we do need a guide of how to speak.... (hrm sounds like
school :-)
Although we always need a mechanism of dealing with the pure flamer (ie the
empty content type). My experience suggests that these people cannot be
convinced by moral guides.
> I am rambling as usual. Phil
Though, I am interested in your thoughts on how to make this group work
again.
Mike
Isofarro
-T- for r.g.c.c technical stuff
-M- for r.g.c.c miscellaneous stuff.
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7djv26$9r6$1...@news04.btx.dtag.de>...
>Just a short remark about that - M - in the header. It should
>differentiate the post with posts about more technical topics that
>should bear a - T - in the subject line. Just a try to help people to
>enjoy the group without having to read all through long threads if they
>are only interested in techno computer chess. What do you think,
>dear reader?
>
>=================================================
>
>"Isofarro" <mi...@isofarro.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
><7djo2s$vsl$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>
>>I like the idea. You are right, it saves splitting up the group. Shall we
>>see what the rest of the group think of this too?
>
>Why not start right away? It's not my concept to ask people if I were
>allowed to to this or that. I'm following the concept that I must have
>good reasons myself to do this or that. All we two who discussed this in
>a somewhat hidden threat with a false subject line should do is starting
>right away. So I will start by imputing the label to this new post. Just
>now I made the - M - label. NB that we should add two "-" for reasons of
>being sorted out from mere Ms in normal words. The in-between gap should
>also be included. I don't know the term for this 'nothing'.
Now we have started the ball rolling with the -M- header, I hope people will
follow it too!
Sounds good. These could be a start to the guidelines that Phil suggested in
one of his replies.
<snip>
>Methinks the best we could do is to construct a
>purely techno section where Bob can demonstrate his great wisdom on
>computer chess. But beware to think that he should also take part in the
>Misc section. A single anonymous who let a red hering into the water
>would invite Bob again to go over the edge. Bob deliberately and
>literally said that this is how it all began. Completely ignoring that
>it's a real weakness of an expert or grown-up to take offence by such
>games.
That's one of the reasons we need a safe-guard, or some mechanism of
filtering out such red herrings. To protect everybody in the group, so they
can concentrate on great content.
Its a natural reaction not to ignore such off-topic stuf - I know I have the
same weakness myself.
Again, another useful guideline. Both -T- and -M- will interest the experts,
and for people like you and I only the -M-. Newbie posts will naturally fall
into the -M- category, unless they are trying to write their own chess
program.
>Thank you a lot. From my side I want to signal you that I don't need
>further continuations from your side. Perhaps that would spoil your
>neutral position. But you can count me among those who want to support
>the end of such off-topics.
Thanks!
Paula Bell
<< Rolf, thanks for your thoughts. I was sceptical that you would not want this
newsgroup to be a moderated one. I'm grateful you have proved me wrong.
I think we are both a bit fed up of these off-post topics. >>
Man, the elderly Mr. Tueschen has put on his porkchops and your have fallen for
it. Hook line and sinker.
Sincerley
Paula
Rolf Tueschen
<7dkr5d$jl0$2...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>I'm going to give it a try, thanks Rolf.
> -T- for r.g.c.c technical stuff
> -M- for r.g.c.c miscellaneous stuff.
>Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7djv26$9r6$1...@news04.btx.dtag.de>...
>>Methinks the best we could do is to construct a
>>purely techno section where Bob can demonstrate his great wisdom on
>>computer chess. But beware to think that he should also take part in the
>>Misc section. A single anonymous who let a red hering into the water
>>would invite Bob again to go over the edge. Bob deliberately and
>>literally said that this is how it all began. Completely ignoring that
>>it's a real weakness of an expert or grown-up to take offence by such
>>games.
>That's one of the reasons we need a safe-guard, or some mechanism of
>filtering out such red herrings. To protect everybody in the group, so they
>can concentrate on great content.
>Its a natural reaction not to ignore such off-topic stuf - I know I have the
>same weakness myself.
Not at all. That you have it too doesn't mean that it's quite normal.
It's always the litmus test for real smartness.
Usenet is even more. It's not a universitary seminary. So, it not
required to correct all sorts of false statements. You are free to make
your choice. Just there you have the point where smartness is needed.
Know what I mean?
There doesn't exist a member here who is such a super trooper who could
replace the lack of smartness in single posters. No, we all have to do
it ourselves. The M/T seperation was the idea for a better life for many
of those who had no time to do all the time-consuming discrimination
work by themselves.
Rolf Tueschen
>> A bit like CCC as it was planned, not as it's now, where
>> Bob is allowed to call people idiots who did nothing but post their
>> opinions -- without dirty words at all. I mean the Charles Unruh post.
>> The only thing he did was give an extrem view about Bob's consequences.
>> I mean the consequences his posts had on others.
>Rolf,
>Perhaps you did not see it, but Mr. Unruh (whom I suspect is someone else using
>an alias) posted a second, and very nasty, post that was taken off CCC after
>about 1/2 an hour on the site. It was something about "Hyatt's Top Ten Bronies
>ast CCC".
Moment please. I wrote that Unruh did NOT use dirty words in his post.
Now you come and tell me that he did use it in a second post but a post
that was so quickly deleted that I had no time to read? How about
sending me the full text of this second post? I hereby promise that I
will never make use of it here in public.
But unless you send me that post you have no right to defame Unruh
indirectly for his first post. Because that post did NOT contain dirty
vocabulary.
>It was quite clearly a personal attack directed at Hyatt and the ten
>listed.
Who were the 10 listed?
>I was one of those unfortunate to have read it while it was posted, but
>it was trhere. Also quite clear was that the original post was a VERY thinly
>veiled personal attack. Mr. Unruh (and I doubt that's his real name) had nothing
>useful to contribute.
How do yo define "useful"??
Bob Hyatt was allowed to cal Unruh an idiot? Was that useful? I get the
idea why you landed on that list too? Please let me examin that post
myself.
Rolf Tueschen
<7dkr5b$jl0$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>Phil Innes wrote in message <36FD9090...@sover.net>...
>> Hi "Isofarro"
>The reasons may or may not be logical, I don't think its wise for me to be
>drawn into commenting here. My sole criteria is of content (rich content
>makes a newsgroup?). Take away such 'unreasonable' remarks out of the forum
>and we are left with two types of postings:
>* One with content
>* One empty.
This is totally wrong. Excuse me.
You can only say that if you define 'content' in a wrong way. There are
different sorts of content but there are no posts without content on
usenet. If you want even a seemingly contentless post has a very telling
content. I fear that you are going a very elitarian, and also false,
road/direction.
>The sad thing is, which is almost always the case, when people are attacked
>the true content of a posting is ignored, and only the ugly stuff is seen.
>Lets limit correspondence to content (we already have an alt.flame newsgroup
>*grin*).
As it has been proven in the history of academical life you can't forbid
such "ugly stuff". Because even among the nuns of a monastery you would
find very hidden and sophisticated "ugly" things. It all depends of the
choce of your teminology. I mean you will surely understand that you can
call someone an a___le without even mentioning or using gutter language
at all. You could even hide it in a seemingly friendly and admiring
post.
>> It is my observation that the looser the newsgroup - that is,
>> the more varied and liberal - the less flame und-angst-mit,
>> there is. The more you can chat on some side-line
>> conversation, the easier it is to approach another poster,
>> because you have some guide of how to speak with him. Some
>> sort of mutual code, and thereby, less angry
>> misunderstandings, and so on.
>Yes, I've seen it happen to. I'm not advocating total censorship here, but
>only a process where someone (titled a moderator) can step in like a referee
>and remove virulent and aggressive articles so the rest of the group can
>concentrate on computer chess.
I never met a guy who could do such a delicate task.
>The moderator-to-be needs to be as liberal as
>they come, else we start losing the content - I think CCC is a class example
>of correct moderation, from what I've seen.
You must be really uninformed. Without wanting to become too personal
let me explain. One of the actual moderators is Faber. A casual member
here in rgcc for the last two years. I've read all his postings. The guy
simply has no understanding. He doesn't understand chess. Note that he's
a class 5 player as I could see in some ranking lists in Germany. Class
5 is about 1500 maximum. But he has also no understanding of computer
chess. Still he's a normal user of chess software. And over the time he
has won much experience without a doubt. But nevertheless _all_ his
posts here into rgcc showed one thing. He has no understanding of
intelligent exchanges. Look, most of the time he posted some pretentious
two liners for questions that were already debated in the group with
pages and pages of explanations. Know what I mean?
And his posts where he had to correct his own two or one liners are
legendary. But here I want to admit that it's possible that he has
difficulties to understand English ...
But take also this. This moderator is primitive enough to go into the
gambitsoft discussion forum for instance and attack me with my full name
for being responsible for Bob Hyatts leaving rgcc. He lied about being
insulted likewise by me all over the time. Truth is that I commented to
him only two times where I had tried to give him a friendly advice NOT
to post a week after the debate was already ended ...
For you this guy has the style you wanted to see here for a moderator
who should be allowed to delete postings??? You must be kidding. Such a
guy simply has no experience. he might be a lovable chess enthusiast but
he has no style and decency to handle the dynamics of such a usenet
group.
let me end this flame with the mentioning of Faber's coalition with
Herttrich, the guy who once sent me to the local vet for an easy
killing. Both repeatedly posted a disclaimer that they had decided to
ignore my postings. Everybody was invited to join their email list. But
in over a year NOBODY joined the fools.
Do you need further amunition?
>They reacted as quickly as they
>could in removing unwanted postings.
>Yes, good point, we do need a guide of how to speak.... (hrm sounds like
>school :-)
That's the point. Some people are too close to their school times ...
BTW I'm 24/25, how old are you? :)
>Although we always need a mechanism of dealing with the pure flamer (ie the
>empty content type). My experience suggests that these people cannot be
>convinced by moral guides.
But usenet is no sanatory or church for elderly people. It's open and
free. A 50 y. old will always take the ignorance of a 20 y. old as an
offence! Know what I mean?!!
Phil Innes
Thanks, this is what can be achieved with some moderation (though, I
admit,
at the moment it is self-moderation).
This is the best kind.
The reasons may or may not be logical, I don't think its wise for me to
be
drawn into commenting here. My sole criteria is of content (rich content
makes a newsgroup?). Take away such 'unreasonable' remarks out of the
forum
and we are left with two types of postings:
Don't fear a flaming-thing with me. I only remark that people
will write rationally and otherwise, because I see your
statement "there is no reason for it."
::The reasons may not be rational ones.
I think the other thing that happens when there is moderation
is that the conversation goes elsewhere. From ccc it comes
here, from here it goes to bad-email.
Although we always need a mechanism of dealing with the pure flamer (ie
the
empty content type). My experience suggests that these people cannot be
convinced by moral guides.
I think that the best possibility lies in demonstration.
Sometimes it is hard to say "I am wrong, you are right" but
these are, if anything, the moral guides we should follow.
Would you trust anyone who cannot own the fact that they are
wrong?
And some people cannot admit *even the possibility* that they
are wrong.
Having a "pure" computer-chess forum needs to accommodate this
fact.
Sorry to involve you here beyond a comfort level. But this
conversation goes around and around, and I accused you earlier
of saying something sensible about it.
Cordially, Phil.
Rolf Tueschen
<36FDBA8C...@teleweb.at>:
>Jeremiah Penery schrieb:
>> Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>> >
>> > Just a short remark about that - M - in the header. It should
>> > differentiate the post with posts about more technical topics that
>> > should bear a - T - in the subject line. Just a try to help people to
>> > enjoy the group without having to read all through long threads if they
>> > are only interested in techno computer chess. What do you think,
>> > dear reader?
>>
>> One thing I have seen in another group is prefacing the subject line
>> with TAN: to signify that the thread is tangential to the topic of the
>> newsgroup. It seems to work quite well there.
>>
>> Jeremiah
>I have also seen TID - thread is deteriorating. Doesn't mean that nonsense
>only is going on, just that focus is lost.
>Charley
If it's allowed, Jerry and Charly or Chrilly(?), I have the impression
that you opened a new category.
Or, after a closer examination, perhaps we could say that your category
is always a sub-group in the two sections -T- and -M-.
Let me explain what I mean.
I think we could clarify this for the - M - section in the most esiest
way. If you have a debate about cc cheats concrete on the CRAY/Hyatt
question for 1986 (as Sam defined it) _then_ it would be TAN and/or TID
if someone began to talk about the "similar" cheat in the actual DEEP
BLUE/IBM/teamsters cheating question. Of course the latter had a clear
justification to be discussed in -M- but it would not directly focus on
the actual question of CRAY/Hyatt. So, in effect you ended in such TAN
-M- header subjects. At this moment however I see a difficulty. Who
should add the exact and significant letters? Also if you realise that
often enough people make several chapters in one post. With different
topics. So, where do you draw the line? Also, all this gives the
impression that we could ameliorate people's thought process just by
inventing a lot of 'letters' for the subject line ... This has
tragic/comical aspects and one could feel invited to ROTFL. Pirouette
included.
The idea should be restricted to a roughly to be seen boarder between
technical stuff and something we call rest or misc. Please don't confuse
it with garbage. BECAUSE by definition, many posts into -T- might be
garbage too. It only depends of the level you are judging from.
Unfortunately I can't provide you with a good example. Perhaps the bean
counter paradigma vs. the knowledge approach ould describe best what I
mean. Certain bean-counters would regard "premature" knowledhe attempts
as needless tries that would be useless anyway the moment the ply depth
is being pushed beyond this or that mark, say 18 plies deep. Or 23?
The main purpose of the rough distinction is NOT a scientifically
justified seperation but a practical advantage for those who have less
time and still want to dearly profit from the techno advices. To help
these guys we need a fast discrimination tool. This would also have good
consequence for the climate of the group because the humiliating
extinction of concrete human beings is no longer needed.
my main idea behind all this is that many developments here came out of
a real need and the impossibility to win time with simple filters.
Because even Bob went tangential, to say the least, at times ...
(BTW it's over a month or two that I already posted this idea about
"seperating". But nobody did react. Nobody.)
Folks, you could create your own definitions, I could also think of a
seperation between a pure computer chess group as it's called now and a
_hobby_ group where all sorts of such sidelines could be discussed,
either that are debated for the 25th time for the last two years, note
that always new members enter the group, or that debate stuff like the
sympathies members had for this or that "giant". Know what I mean. In
such a group almost ALL things should be allowed. It's like a club who
meets once a week in a barroom. Also keep in mind that usenet is NOT a
universitary labaratory but a space for such meetings of hobby groups.
Your examples out of specific programmers groups, for certain languages
and stuff like that, is a bad example for our community because for the
other groups you could take part in 20 + n different groups and all
together would mean your hobby or profession. But here we have only one
group for all the details of computer chess programming, tournament
playing, user wuestions for hard/software and the like. It's needless to
seperate all that into different groups. Why? Because of the lack of
members. Look into CCC. I bet that perhaps some 60 members are there.
The rest is a fake/pseudonymous anononymous posters. To insinuate that
CCC had perhaps 7000 members seems like crazy to me. That could only be
pretended by people who have no insight into maths or stats. Look into
the polls and you get the idea.
Isofarro
that is looking for common ground to start from.
I understand that you are one who has also been victimised and harrassed
here. I've only seen references of it. I am saddened by it. We are here to
talk about computer chess?
At least lets make a stand to make this group work. Who knows, with a
moderated group, we might be able to tempt Bob back again, along with other
gifted programmers we have lost on the way.
A lot of bad things and remarks have been passed here. A lot of people have
been upset. Yeah, you are right - what do I know about it.
Have we all given up trying? I guess I need to know the answer to this
before I decide whether I should take the flack for trying to make this
group back to the place it once was..... If nobody is bothered - I guess its
better I too admit I'm just a dreamer. Yes, I'm testing the waters at the
moment.
Mike
Paula Bell wrote in message <36FE0830...@pacific.nospam.net>...
Isofarro
Rolf Tueschen wrote in message <7dl3nm$asg$1...@news02.btx.dtag.de>...
>"Isofarro" <mi...@isofarro.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in
><7dkr5b$jl0$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk>:
>
>>Phil Innes wrote in message <36FD9090...@sover.net>...
>>> Hi "Isofarro"
>
>>drawn into commenting here. My sole criteria is of content (rich content
>>makes a newsgroup?). Take away such 'unreasonable' remarks out of the
forum
>>and we are left with two types of postings:
>
>>* One empty.
>
>This is totally wrong. Excuse me.
>
>You can only say that if you define 'content' in a wrong way. There are
>different sorts of content but there are no posts without content on
>usenet. If you want even a seemingly contentless post has a very telling
>content. I fear that you are going a very elitarian, and also false,
>road/direction.
Very true, I have to be very precise on what I mean by content - or I will
look elitist.
For me, I define personal attacks and threats as 'having no content' because
they do not enhance the understanding of topics under discussion, only serve
to enrage people within the group.
>
>>The sad thing is, which is almost always the case, when people are
attacked
>>the true content of a posting is ignored, and only the ugly stuff is seen.
>>Lets limit correspondence to content (we already have an alt.flame
newsgroup
>>*grin*).
>
>As it has been proven in the history of academical life you can't forbid
>such "ugly stuff". Because even among the nuns of a monastery you would
>find very hidden and sophisticated "ugly" things. It all depends of the
>choce of your teminology. I mean you will surely understand that you can
>call someone an a___le without even mentioning or using gutter language
>at all. You could even hide it in a seemingly friendly and admiring
>post.
Yes, it cannot be forbidden, but we can try to temper it by some loose
moderation. If only try and if that fails, at least we know we did try.
>
>>> It is my observation that the looser the newsgroup - that is,
>>> the more varied and liberal - the less flame und-angst-mit,
>>> there is. The more you can chat on some side-line
>>> conversation, the easier it is to approach another poster,
>>> because you have some guide of how to speak with him. Some
>>> sort of mutual code, and thereby, less angry
>>> misunderstandings, and so on.
>
>
>>Yes, I've seen it happen to. I'm not advocating total censorship here, but
>>only a process where someone (titled a moderator) can step in like a
referee
>>and remove virulent and aggressive articles so the rest of the group can
>>concentrate on computer chess.
>I never met a guy who could do such a delicate task.
Maybe, we'd need someone who isn't an integral part of the group.
>
>>The moderator-to-be needs to be as liberal as
>>they come, else we start losing the content - I think CCC is a class
example
>>of correct moderation, from what I've seen.
>
>You must be really uninformed. Without wanting to become too personal
>let me explain. One of the actual moderators is Faber.
I haven't come across him yet on CCC, though he is only one of the
moderators. Maybe a group of moderators has a better chance of stability
than one 'rouge'?
>Do you need further amunition?
I'm not looking for ammunition, just a feeling of whether or not I'd be
wasting my time going through a process to make this newsgroup friendlier.
We had some great days a long time ago. Maybe I'm just an idiot with his
head in the clouds dreaming we could recreate that again.
>>Yes, good point, we do need a guide of how to speak.... (hrm sounds like
>>school :-)
>
>That's the point. Some people are too close to their school times ...
Yes, its impossible to expect everyone to be as sensitive and diplomatic - a
reason to have a filtering mechanism? I get the feeling there are too many
subversive elements whose sole purpose is to wreck havoc on people - and
that is for them fun. And of course, it takes one of these posting
annonymously and bang - we have a problem.
>BTW I'm 24/25, how old are you? :)
The same....
>But usenet is no sanatory or church for elderly people. It's open and
>free. A 50 y. old will always take the ignorance of a 20 y. old as an
>offence! Know what I mean?!!
Yes, I know what you mean. We can never have a 100 percent solution to this
problem. With so many languages and cultures and age-groups abound we are
always going to have some friction.
UltraB
Paula Bell wrote in message <36FE0830...@pacific.nospam.net>...
>Isofarro wrote:
>
><< Rolf, thanks for your thoughts. I was sceptical that you would not want
this
> newsgroup to be a moderated one. I'm grateful you have proved me wrong.
>
> I think we are both a bit fed up of these off-post topics. >>
>
>
>Man, the elderly Mr. Tueschen has put on his porkchops and your have fallen
for
>it. Hook line and sinker.
>
>Sincerley
>Paula
Maybe it's another case of Rolf talking to Rolf.
Isofarro
UltraB wrote in message ...
Todd Durham
Rolf Tueschen wrote:
> Todd Durham <sp...@gator.net> wrote in <36FDC060...@gator.net>:
>
> >> A bit like CCC as it was planned, not as it's now, where
> >> Bob is allowed to call people idiots who did nothing but post their
> >> opinions -- without dirty words at all. I mean the Charles Unruh post.
> >> The only thing he did was give an extrem view about Bob's consequences.
> >> I mean the consequences his posts had on others.
>
> >Rolf,
>
> >Perhaps you did not see it, but Mr. Unruh (whom I suspect is someone else using
> >an alias) posted a second, and very nasty, post that was taken off CCC after
> >about 1/2 an hour on the site. It was something about "Hyatt's Top Ten Bronies
> >ast CCC".
>
> Moment please. I wrote that Unruh did NOT use dirty words in his post.
> Now you come and tell me that he did use it in a second post but a post
> that was so quickly deleted that I had no time to read? How about
> sending me the full text of this second post? I hereby promise that I
> will never make use of it here in public.
It makes no difference. I didn't save it, as I saw no reason to do so. It wasn't
something I thought worth while. This is a big problem with a web-based set-up like
CCC: no dejanews available.
> But unless you send me that post you have no right to defame Unruh
> indirectly for his first post. Because that post did NOT contain dirty
> vocabulary.
You can email Mr Unruh for it, if you like. And I may as well, as he was perfectly
willing to defame others. Frankly, I don'trecall whether it had any dirty words in it
or not. Nor, if you read my prior post, did I say it did. I said it was rather nasty.
But one doesn't have to use Carlin's Seven Dirty Words to be nasty.
> >It was quite clearly a personal attack directed at Hyatt and the ten
> >listed.
>
> Who were the 10 listed?
What difference does it make? I've seen almost identical posts here.
>
>
> >I was one of those unfortunate to have read it while it was posted, but
> >it was trhere. Also quite clear was that the original post was a VERY thinly
> >veiled personal attack. Mr. Unruh (and I doubt that's his real name) had nothing
> >useful to contribute.
>
> How do yo define "useful"??
In the context CCC? A post on on the topic of computer chess is what I go there for.
After Hyatt left rgcc, several threads on that topic started. I followed them hoping
to find out something about starting a moderated news group. Instead, there were a
long series of posts bemoaning the growing uselessness of rgcc and posts that sounded
more like obituaries than anything else. Some small amount of talk concerning the
nasty tone of discussions here took a sudden turn for the worse when Mr Unruh (whose
email address was rather similar to various addresses Zarathustra uses, btw) sent in
a lengthy comment placing blame squarely on Hyatt's shoulders. This had no place
there in any event. And neither did the bitching about why Hyatt (and so many others)
had left. Unless, of course, it was in a contest of forming a moderated news group,
and what should the policies of moderation be. I even tried to start such a thread,
and eventually got some helpful responses. Mostly from the people on Mr Unruh's list,
I should add.
> Bob Hyatt was allowed to cal Unruh an idiot? Was that useful? I get the
> idea why you landed on that list too? Please let me examin that post
> myself.
He was not. His post was removed WELL BEFORE Mr. Unruh's post was. Eventually, the
moderators killed the whole thread. Oh, and I didn't land on the list. I guess I'm
below Mr. Unruh's horizon. Of course, he's below mine, now, so it makes no
difference.
michael adams
John Olle
> After a lot of consideration, I have come to the conclusion that
> the only way to 'win this war' is to 'resign this battle'.
Well thanks to all of the idiots that have driven away another of my net
heroes!
Thanks for filling up otherwise informative newsgroups with junk and
worse!
The only reason that these idiots don't set up their own newgroups is
that noone would use them.
They only attract attention by attaching themselves to those who make
the chess world a better place by sharing their intellects and ideas
with the rest of us. They are intellectual parasites who don't appear to
have lives of their own.
Unfortunately, it looks like Moderation is the way to go. I had hoped
that the world was a better place than this.
Bye Bob and thanks! I have learnt a great deal from your many generous
and informative posts.
John Olle
--
Visit the Bendigo Chess Club home page:
url:
http://ironbark.bendigo.latrobe.edu.au/staff/olle/chess/bcchome.html
Anders Thulin
Niko Wellingk <n...@niksula.hut.fi> wrote:
>Why is it that a celebrity always get stalked by some
>no-life? Must be jealousy or something. I will buy
>"lack of brains" for an explanation, too.
There are entomological analogies.
Cockroackes like restaurants -- not because the like the food, but
because practically anything that appears in a restaurant *is* food to
them. Even the waste. Of course, cockroaches can manage perfectly
well without restaurants, but, heck, why make things more difficult
than necessary?
It usually takes only one, highly visible cockroach to make the
guests leave.
--
Anders Thulin Anders....@telia.se 013-23 55 32
Telia ProSoft AB, Teknikringen 6, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden