A question for Harvey Williamson

[Chris Whittington]

if somebody demands that a handicapped operator should carry his PC during a blitz tournament although this person needs crutches, i cannot understand the concept of "care" anymore.

For those of you who don't know the reference, this was in Paris 1997. See the CCC archives.

Subject: Paris Blitz tournament Thorsten "live" after round 4
From: Ingo Althofer
Message Number: 11473
Date: November 01, 1997 at 11:51:29

Peter Schreiner ( MChess Operator in main tournament ) is operating CSTal in Blitz event. He has a broken leg and is hobbling with the help of two crutches.

The idea was to let him sit all rounds at the same place. But Bruce Moreland protested; the compromise regulation then was: Peter Schreiner has to change place only if his direct opponent for the next round insists on this.

There was also a thread about why Thorsten did not operate CSTal (or CW for that matter, who was "going out"), and perhaps one involving Moreland's hemorrhoids.

Subject: Re: WMCCC next year
From: Chris Whittington
Message Number: 11803
Date: November 09, 1997 at 08:07:41

This is not true in detail, so I will give you the facts:

1. Thorsten went on strike for the Blitz, he refused to participate or operate.

2. Peter Schreiner volunteered to operate instead.

3. Peter had a broken ankle, was on crutches, and asked me to find a way for him not to have to move round between games. Also he had a special chair to sit on. there was a 'stay in place' precedent with Louwmann always sitting by the door because of air/breathing difficulties.

4. I asked van den Herik, beofre the start, if Peter could stay in one place, he needed a special chair, I had to go out, so couldn't help him move, van den Herik said ok, that was fine.

5. Bruce got to hear about this, and immediately put in an official complaint. Peter should move round like everybody else, said Bruce.

6. I accused Bruce of being churlish. Bruce said he had to move last year when he had flu and this year when he had haemoroids (which hurt, apparently).

7. van den herik ruled that Peter could stay in one place, except when the opposing operator wanted him to move.

8. Bruce appeared less angry, but still looked churlish.

9. I could no longer go out because of this, so me and Thorsten had to stay and move Peter's computer and chair and whatever. Peter hobbled around on his crutches between the rounds.

I suppose if any proof is needed that Bruce just like to oppose anything ever said, done or proposed by chris whittington or the CSTal team, this provides it.

His 'official' complaint and subsequent behaviour and attitude speak for themselves.

The worries with #3 (both the extent of the injury in this case, and of the precedent) were also thrashed about. The mis-use of accelerated pairings was the other main debate about the event.

Yet another reminder of how comp chess contains many zero-sum games players with little or no humanity

[Chris Whittington]

in USA those christian believing people (tea party) who call for murder,
also need to be set free.

there is no big difference between believing people in different parts of the world.

Thorsten,

We're pretty lax about the Forum Rules here, but what does this have to do with computer chess? I understand your frustration with totalitarian authority in all of its present-day forms, including online chess services. And I understand that you equate anti-IPPOLIT fervor with religious fervor. But I think you've stretched the analogy about as far as it can go, and you're beginning to enter CTF territory... Just a suggestion - there have been some complaints.

Jeremy

Complaints?! talkchess complainers nearly all fall into the cagetory of right-wing american christian nutjobs who believe they can spread their one-ideology-fits-all lunacy whilst simultaneously rudely attacking anything else. Thorsten represents an opposite view and long may his unique contribution to computer chess fora continue. Practically all creatives/producers accept Thorsten as Thorsten, a part of life's rich tapestry. It's only the non-cretaive nutjobs who hate him. Ignore them.

[orgfert]

Complaints?! talkchess complainers ....

Perhaps you could talk chess for a change, particularly your creative process as queried in this thread.
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?p=7270#p7270
I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in your creative contributions.

[Chris Whittington]

Complaints?! talkchess complainers ....

Perhaps you could talk chess for a change, particularly your creative process as queried in this thread.
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?p=7270#p7270
I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in your creative contributions.

I have this curious habit of attracting stalkers it seems

[orgfert]

Complaints?! talkchess complainers ....

Perhaps you could talk chess for a change, particularly your creative process as queried in this thread.
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?p=7270#p7270
I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in your creative contributions.

I have this curious habit of attracting stalkers it seems

Talk chess, not paranoia.

[Chris Whittington]

Complaints?! talkchess complainers ....

Perhaps you could talk chess for a change, particularly your creative process as queried in this thread.
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?p=7270#p7270
I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in your creative contributions.

I have this curious habit of attracting stalkers it seems

Talk chess, not paranoia.

answering a stalker just one day appears to bring about an orgasmic rush of stalking posts, one after the other.

is it love or hate or both that drives you? either way I don't really approve of being masturbated over.

[orgfert]

Complaints?! talkchess complainers ....

Perhaps you could talk chess for a change, particularly your creative process as queried in this thread.
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?p=7270#p7270
I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in your creative contributions.

I have this curious habit of attracting stalkers it seems

Talk chess, not paranoia.

answering a stalker just one day appears to bring about an orgasmic rush of stalking posts, one after the other.

I recall one Cornelius Smeg (and many other identities of similar nom de plumage) stalking Ed Schroder on talkchess with prolific recidivism. You still can't get the place and it's unholy inhabitants out of your mind. You spray Open Chess with unending execration and fantastical tales of talkchess horror. But not everyone at Open Chess is enamored with your novelizations. If you don't like your checkered veracity brooked with, talk about something you do understand, like chess on computers. For instance, your challenges to Bob's testing methodology were penetrating and informative.

[orgfert]

Complaints?! talkchess complainers ....

Perhaps you could talk chess for a change, particularly your creative process as queried in this thread.
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?p=7270#p7270
I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in your creative contributions.

I have this curious habit of attracting stalkers it seems

Talk chess, not paranoia.

answering a stalker just one day appears to bring about an orgasmic rush of stalking posts, one after the other.

I recall one Cornelius Smeg (and many other identities of similar nom de plumage) stalking Ed Schroder on talkchess with prolific recidivism. You still can't get the place and it's unholy inhabitants out of your mind. You spray Open Chess with unending execration and fantastical tales of talkchess horror. But not everyone at Open Chess is enamored with your novelizations. If you don't like your checkered veracity brooked with, talk about something you do understand, like chess on computers. For instance, your challenges to Bob's testing methodology demonstrated insight and information.