Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   'Modeling' recent debates using chess
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4089 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 68 of 70 (102727)
04-26-2004 2:44 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by DNAunion
04-12-2004 9:49 AM


DNAunion writes:
Uhm excuse me, but...he stated I called him a liar, but I didn't.
Actually, you did. In post 57, you wrote:
quote:
Nope, not true. You also claimed to have easily solved a chess puzzle that involved a non-apparent queen sac; a claim that simply doesn’t fit your original, ignorance-revealing statement DNAunion ... was fortunate enough to squeak out a defensive stalemate by repetition posture.
DNAunion writes:
I must wonder why you would have a problem with me trying to defend myself against an unwarranted and false accusation.
Even if you want to play the silly game of pointing out that you never directly used the word "liar," the idea that this is an "unwarranted" accusation is simply untenable. It is most certainly warranted based on your statement in post 57.
Check and mate.
Also, you missed the fact that Percy was not warning you about defending yourself against a true accusation, he was reprimanding you for behaving in such a way as to cause conflicts with numerous board members. In this case, the problem started when you flew off the handle, just because Amlodhi questioned the self-proclaimed brilliance of your play against your son's computer.
It would be foolish of you to think that the problem was really his overly general use of the word "stalemate." Your problem was with the stab at your ego, and complaining about his use of the word "stalemate" is more justifiable than complaining because your ego was poked at.
If that's not obvious to you, I would guess it is obvious to everyone else, and that sort of behavior is the source of Admin's warning to you.
{added by edit: It was Adminemooseus who issued the warning, not Admin Percy; my mistake.}
[This message has been edited by truthlover, 04-26-2004]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by DNAunion, posted 04-12-2004 9:49 AM DNAunion has not replied

  
truthlover
Member (Idle past 4089 days)
Posts: 1548
From: Selmer, TN
Joined: 02-12-2003


Message 70 of 70 (102730)
04-26-2004 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Percy
03-29-2004 12:58 PM


Re: Ratings
Percy writes:
My USCF rating was 1349 in 1969...I once beat a 1700!
I reckon we'd be just about the same level. I once got an exchange up on a 2207 player in a 1-hour game tournament. He thought he had an attack on my castled king, but I was pretty sure I could refute it. He underestimated me, because I was 1300 or so at the time, and I forked his Q and R with my Knight.
I got in a great position, then made the exact same blunder he did, not paying attention to a Knight in an attacking position, and I gave the exchange back and lost a tight game. Horribly disappointing.
I did beat a 1900 player the same day, though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Percy, posted 03-29-2004 12:58 PM Percy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024