Author: Uri Blass
Date: 18:18:52 08/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2004 at 20:42:17, Mike Byrne wrote: >On August 21, 2004 at 16:14:08, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 21, 2004 at 15:48:11, Graham Banks wrote: >> >>>Ever heard of innocent until proven guilty? >> >>Yes but in the case of List the suspect is stronger than some baseless >>accusation because the ICGA decided to ban list. >> >>I expect that innocent person in this situation will do some steps to defend >>himself and Fritz did nothing. >> >>If some newspaper claim bad things about you and you do nothing against the >>newspaper then it is natural that people believe the newspaper inspite of the >>fact that there is no proof excpet the fact that it was written in the >>newspaper. >> >>Uri > >I hope you are not picked as a juror with your preconceived notions of innocence >and guilt based on behavior patterns. The "requirement" to defend if you are >innocent is degrading and I can understand perfectly well why he elected not to >defend. It has no relevancy on his guilt or innocence. Also,If you believe >everything you read in a newspaper that is not refuted is true, not all your >beliefs will be true. It will serve you well to always carry around healthy >dose of professional skepicism. Btw, we're talking about a program that plays >a "game" -- in the big picture it may be that important to Reul to defend. I do not believe that everything in the newspaper is correct(I know that there are cases when there is even contradiction between different newspapers) but if a big newspaper publish really bad things against sombody(and I am not talking about every mistake in details about him but about accusation of something that he is not quilty) then I expect the person to do something against the newspaper if the claim of the newspaper is a lie. Uri
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.