Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 11:34:59 06/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 29, 2000 at 22:59:30, Will Singleton wrote: >On June 29, 2000 at 20:40:53, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On June 29, 2000 at 19:19:14, Fernando Villegas wrote: >> >>>On June 29, 2000 at 17:30:24, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>> >>>>We (the moderators) have been getting a lot of user feedback regarding Hans >>>>Gerber. This afternoon, we finally decided to (temporarily) suspend him. The >>>>process took so long because of disagreements between moderators, his reluctance >>>>to identify himself, etc. I apologize for the "delayed reaction" and hope that >>>>our action appropriately addresses everybody's complaints. >>>> >>>>-Tom >>> >>>Just some questions and observations: >>>a) How much post are "a lot of feedback"? >>>b) do you count as counter-feedback the post that does not ask you nothing >>>against Hans Geber or whatever he could be? >>>c) and by the way, why are you stopping thread short of completion as if in them >>>we were telling dirty jokes? >>>d) which is the proof and not the suspiction that Gerber is Tueschen? I do not >>>want to be heavy, but some paranoids posts has been posted in the past -I >>>myself, I have commited that sin- trying to dicover Chris Wittintong ego behind >>>almost any new poster that happened to write so well or so sharp as Chris. >>>e) I thought witch-hunting was out of fashion. >>>f) Even if Gerber is a new Tueschen incarnation, so what? Did he kill somebody? >>>OK, some people here does not like his post or the kind of post pertainning to >>>this kind of real poster or supposed poster called Tueschen, but then what. I >>>did not know a member was compelled to read everything. >>>g) I am in this club almost from the beginning and so I know well about wars and >>>threads and again I wonder, so what? This is not a chapel where kids sing >>>Chritmas songs, this a club where grown-up people gather and talks and if >>>somebody cannot resist the style of Mr X, well, he can go, he can just not read >>>Mr X, he can answer, he cand do what he please. What he should not do is this >>>school-shy-boy behaviour of asking "fa" to come to the rescue. >>>Fernando >> >>Sorry to take the wind out of your sails, Fernando, but I never said (nor >>implied) that Hans is Rolf. >> >>Also, I know we are grown-ups here, but that doesn't mean we have to tolerate >>crap. If I started posting gay kiddie porn on CCC, would you want me kicked out? >>Or would you write long posts about how we are all adults and if we don't like >>gay kiddie porn, we can just look the other way? IMO, it is weak to defend Hans >>by putting the blame on everybody else. >> >>-Tom > >You got that right. Dead on. > >Will He did not get that right. It is easy to seem winning a point just after rejecting a parody of argument. The case of gay porno is one of that parodies, not even a funny one. Besides, is a case of petitio principia to give as a reason that posting was "crap" when precisely one of the things under debate is the quality of the posts by hans. So the only thing that is really dead here is you argumentative capacity as comentator of posters of somebody else. Fernando
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.