Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 16:12:59 09/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 1998 at 18:40:25, Amir Ban wrote: >Reading what you said (you snipped it, so I quote it again below), I think >anyone who reads this will conclude not only that you are calling Nunn a liar, >but calling Friedel a liar too, and accusing Nunn and Friedel of an evil >conspiracy. Nunn - liar - Friedel - liar - Nunn - Friedel - evil - conspiracy this Amir is what you read out of my statements ? Looks little paranoic or ill, doesn't it ? could it be that you have to much fantasy. Maybe your projections are stronger than my own ideas about these persons. I do not think into these categories. You seem to do so. I do not waste my time talking about WHAT OTHER PEOPLE MIGHT THINK WHEN THEY READ (my or whoever articles/passages). I am sure the number of possibilities people can imagine out of ONE sentence is nearly infinite. Why shall i now react on any psychotic idea about what I could have meant or what I have said or what i have not said. Those discusssions do not make much sense to me. Let the people think whatever they might think. I don't care. I remember one day i sat in my living room and talking with freddy, john was visiting him, and we discussed about an article , i guess it was about fidelity mach III. I can only say that they have a long and deep friendship. If i would ask somebody to write about chess system tal, to judge or measure it or its strength, would i ask somebody to do the job who is my best friend for years and years ? Would any objective person react this way ? Only somebody who believes that the readers will never find out about the "special relationship" would do so, or ? Make up your mind. I would not subscribe my name under the assumptions you wanted to have read out of my statements. the passage: Nunn - liar - Friedel - liar - Nunn - Friedel - evil - conspiracy looks too ill for me. >You also say something, in another post, something like "no return" which sounds >like a judgement of Dr. Nunn's mental health. right. this refers to a serial of articles he has written long time ago in css. Also my observations of him playing against The King in Den Haag. I don't understand why this has to do with the other i talked about, but - if you want to combine it... >Amir >P.S. Here's what you said: > >>there is NO excuse for the nunn-test. >>the nunn test was, so says css itself, done by nunn for css. he has done it >>specially for his friend frederic. >>frederic is owner of chessBase. and ? the above is the truth. what is wrong here ?!? because it is not your opinion ? >>it is the same when the owner of malboro asks a special cancer-doctor to write >>an article about smoking not beeing dangerous. >> >>you now quote anywhere that smoking is not dangerous because john nunn has said >>this. >>and frederic paid for this... brilliant. thanks for your quote. Although i don't understand what your problem is. all this is written in css. anyone can proof individually.
This page took 0.01 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.