Originally posted by Ragnorakthat's "somebody's", fool...
So using somebodies aggressive sentence structure and wording against them in an internet forum is now being hypocritical if one claims to prefer peace to war in the real world?
Man, you're a bigger idiot than I took you for.
D
yes it is hypocritical. peace-mongering is peace-mongering and aggression is aggression. the context is irrelevant. it's as if a Nobel prize winner were to go home and beat up his wife, then say 'well, out in the real world i'm a peaceful guy'.
a true peace-monger would bring that attitude to every situation he faces, with the possible exception of a physical threat against himself or someone he cared about. you're a fake. someone with your aggressive qualities will never achieve peace.
Originally posted by dfm65You know what's hypocritical? Pointing out a small grammatical mistake, and then going on to post a diatribe full of grammatical errors.
that's "somebody's", fool...
yes it is hypocritical. peace-mongering is peace-mongering and aggression is aggression. the context is irrelevant. it's as if a Nobel prize winner were to go home and beat up his wife, then say 'well, out in the real world i'm a peaceful guy'.
a true peace-monger would bring that attitude to every situation he faces ...[text shortened]... he cared about. you're a fake. someone with your aggressive qualities will never achieve peace.
To take your Nobel Prize winner example... would you happily play an OTB tournament match against somebody who was referring to a pocket pc under the table?
Anyway, I've no interest in spending the night arguing with you. You've shown yourself to be pro engine user in this and various other threads. You've also shown yourself to be unbending in your views, both worldly (no matter how simplistic they may be) and with regards to this site.
BTW: You may want to look up Alfred Nobel.
D
Originally posted by dfm65In this case, the context changes everything. When I read Ragnorak's post, I actually thought "maybe he should change his title" - until I realized that he had used exactly your words. That makes the post sarcastic rather than aggressive (using sarcasm to point out how misguided your words were). I don't think being a peace monger and being sarcastic are incompatible, although I guess some people might disagree.
yes it is hypocritical. peace-mongering is peace-mongering and aggression is aggression. the context is irrelevant.
Originally posted by Nordlysi disagree. it was sarcastic AND aggressive. not befitting a self-proclaimed peace-monger (or any other kind).
In this case, the context changes everything. When I read Ragnorak's post, I actually thought "maybe he should change his title" - until I realized that he had used exactly your words. That makes the post sarcastic rather than aggressive (using sarcasm to point out how misguided your words were). I don't think being a peace monger and being sarcastic are incompatible, although I guess some people might disagree.
Originally posted by dfm65Are you going to answer the question or not?
can i have some of your drugs?
ps: non-use of capitals is not a grammatical error in casual online use.
If you saw your opponent referencing chess software running on a pocket pc (or laptop, why be subtle? ) during an OTB tournament, would you be completely happy to play on? Or would you be pissed off and complain?
ps: Says who? And, in casual online use, is misuse of commas a grammatical error?
D
1 edit
Originally posted by Ragnoraklmfao. if someone had the balls to do that, i'd not only play on, but i'd buy them a beer after they trounced me! brings Maradona's 'hand of god' goal to mind. in Argentina, that is apparently the more celebrated of his two goals in the game.
Are you going to answer the question or not?
If you saw your opponent referencing chess software running on a pocket pc (or laptop, why be subtle? ) during an OTB tournament, would you be completely happy to play on? Or would you be ...[text shortened]... n casual online use, is misuse of commas a grammatical error?
D
and there are 43 correct ways commas can be used in English. you're obviously unfamiliar with the vast majority.
Originally posted by dfm65Actually the people who need to get some perspective are those lame enough to cheat on an internet chess site, not those who don't like being cheated. You really have a rather unique world view; I assume you believe people who are robbed should shut up and bear it rather than call the police. And if they complain about the lack of police protection, they should move and the robbers should be allowed to remain residents in good standing of DfmTown.
Spoken like a true peace-monger, or is that spelt 'hypocrite'?
I already own Fritz 8. I enjoy playing against it, though it is a tough opponent. I am sure that playing against it has improved my chess. Therefore I don't mind playing a few more games against it. At any rate, playing internet chess is small potatoes. You people really need to get some perspective.
Originally posted by dfm65OMG, u didn't capitalizzze the beginnings of your sentences, you must be Austrianalazialon after all!
lmfao. if someone had the balls to do that, i'd not only play on, but i'd buy them a beer after they trounced me! brings Maradona's 'hand of god' goal to mind. in Argentina, that is apparently the more celebrated of his two goals in the game.
and there are 43 correct ways commas can be used in English. you're obviously unfamiliar with the vast majority.
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderI've never expressed admiration for chess cheats - except in my reply to Ragnorok re the otb case, and that would be admiration for their sheer audacity. i agree with you -it's a lame thing to do. i just don't believe 1) that it's worth getting hot and steamy about - not when there are so many problems out there in the real world; and 2) that it (detection) could be done reliably except in the more blatant, inept cases. Just laugh at them for being so lame they cheat at internet chess. PM them and let them know you know what they're up to, if it makes you feel better.
Actually the people who need to get some perspective are those lame enough to cheat on an internet chess site, not those who don't like being cheated. You really have a rather unique world view; I assume you believe people who ...[text shortened]... hould be allowed to remain residents in good standing of DfmTown.
In your real-life example, you assume wrong. getting robbed has serious real-world consequences - psychological as well as financial. Being cheated in an internet chess game on which nothing rides but a rating doesn't. This is a case where context does matter.
Originally posted by dfm65Since I'm paying to play on an internet chess site against other human players and since this site's rules forbid using engines, in essence I am being robbed by the engine users. One of the main purposes I'm on this site is to gauge my play against other humans (along with in general improving the quality of my play); I cannot do that accurately if others are cheating. Thus, to some extent what I'm getting from this site is less than what I've paid for. It's true it's not as big a deal as the war in Iraq, but it still rubs me the wrong way to know that people are cheating and getting away with it. If you want to ridicule people for not wanting to be cheated, fine, but I think I have the right to ask the Site Admins to enforce the site rules.
I've never expressed admiration for chess cheats - except in my reply to Ragnorok re the otb case, and that would be admiration for their sheer audacity. i agree with you -it's a lame thing to do. i just don't believe 1) that it's worth getting hot and steamy about - not when there are so many problems out there in the real world; and 2) that it (detection ...[text shortened]... ess game on which nothing rides but a rating doesn't. This is a case where context does matter.
There are other sites: ICC, Playchess and others where you can play engines or use your own engine so long as you declare it. I can also play my own Fritz8 whenever I want. But I prefer playing humans because that's what I'll face in OTB. Obviously, I, the present Game Mods, the Site Admins here and at other sites don't agree that only blatant cheaters can be caught. Even if that were true, wouldn't it be better to at least catch blatant cheaters rather than allow them to continue to cheat?
Originally posted by dfm65I don't think we can ignore this problem, my friend. I really value your input into this cause, but don't you agree that if we did ignore it, that the problem would get worse? 😲
I've never expressed admiration for chess cheats - except in my reply to Ragnorok re the otb case, and that would be admiration for their sheer audacity. i agree with you -it's a lame thing to do. i just don't believe 1) that it's worth getting hot and steamy about - not when there are so many problems out there in the real world; and 2) that it (detection ...[text shortened]... ess game on which nothing rides but a rating doesn't. This is a case where context does matter.
2 edits
Originally posted by arrakisit would help if the current game mods would publish some figures on just how many people have been shown to indisputably be cheating since they began operations. then we would be in a position to gauge how much of a potential problem it is. as i've pointed out before, there are two dimensions to this: the first is how many people will actually cheat - this will partially determine how much effort should be put into their detection. if the site was likely to be literally overrun by hordes of engine cheats, sure it would be a problem. i just don't believe this is the case, and no-one has presented any evidence that this either has happened or will happen. if it is just a few isolated cases, it's not a real problem, and not worth the aggravation. the second dimension is how many people are getting upset about current cheating or the prospect of cheating. there only seem to be a few, though those few are quite vehement in their support of game mods. at this juncture, someone inevitably leaps up and goes on about the vote that was taken. as i have indicated, i don't think this vote was valid. as well as the reasons i have cited before, there will inevitably be a large group of people who aren't all that excited by the issue but think, hey, sounds like i'm getting something for nothing there, so i'll vote yes.
I don't think we can ignore this problem, my friend. I really value your input into this cause, but don't you agree that if we did ignore it, that the problem would get worse? 😲
by far my most serious objections, though, are the fear that innocents will be wrongly fingered, or that it will prove to be such a grey area that the evidence against sophisticated cheats will be inconclusive. i know you have claimed there are reliable techniques for detecting sophisticated engine use, but there is a problem. obviously you would not want to make these techniques public, for fear of tipping off the cheats. but equally, why should we as a community have any faith in these techniques if we don't know what they are?
it's all very well for marauder to say the accused will have a chance to defend themselves, but what can they say in their defence except 'i'm innocent'? and then what can the game mods say except either 'don't believe you, you're toast', or 'sorry. our mistake. carry on...'?