Actually, he hasn't.liuzy wrote:Since Norman has made great contribution to chess, I think it's time to let him return to our community.
Why not let Norman return to chess community
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 1922
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:51 am
- Location: Earth
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
-
- Posts: 660
- Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:13 am
- Location: Colorado, USA
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
Well, the contributions aren't huge, but they are useful, and besides he has been banned for 7 months or something like that......Zach Wegner wrote:Actually, he hasn't.liuzy wrote:Since Norman has made great contribution to chess, I think it's time to let him return to our community.
I have no doubt you could probably have ported Robbo to Windows, fixed the ponder and made it more stable, a lot of people here probably could have. But, they didn't. Norman did. Even though he is banned. Pretty nice of him, no?
Peter
-
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 4:53 pm
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
Why do we have 2 or 3 posts for the same person what is this? Is it his birthday or something? Sounds like a bunch of giddy girls following a rockstar. Just like a boy band, engines come and go. Please no flashing your chest ladies...ROFL
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein
Albert Einstein
-
- Posts: 2331
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 5:36 pm
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
People are not engines, in spite of the fact that people also come and go, like engines. The difference is that people have feelings, and that's the thing you don't have a clue.DomLeste wrote:Why do we have 2 or 3 posts for the same person what is this? Is it his birthday or something? Sounds like a bunch of giddy girls following a rockstar. Just like a boy band, engines come and go. Please no flashing your chest ladies...ROFL
"Well, I´m just a soul whose intentions are good,
Oh Lord, please don´t let me be misunderstood."
Oh Lord, please don´t let me be misunderstood."
-
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 4:53 pm
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
Look up the word "sarcastic" Slobodan.
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
Albert Einstein
Albert Einstein
-
- Posts: 6081
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:14 pm
- Location: Munster, Nuremberg, Princeton
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
A damned untruth/halsehood. He wasnt banned for saying this but because he sold his several clones to the people and that is a crime. Therefore it's alsi in itself dirty to argue that he ported something to Windows and that were a fantastic contribution. This is similar (although one cannot compare the two cases!) to a murderer Bloodgood who spent a life sentence in jail and became a 1.g4 expert. IMO we cant ignore true crimes alone for the integrity of our youth. But honestly I would prefer Bloodgood as a chess expert over Kranium, who BTW is also playing around with many pseudos, and he is, above all, betraying chess fans with his clones. While Bloodgood didnt murder a chessplayer. So that one could argue that his chess dedication had absolutely nothing to do with chess! Other than with Kranium who abused chess fans themselves. That is why I see him a lot more dangerous than a murderer who sits forever in jail.SzG wrote:To be more precise, he kept saying Rybka was a clone but provided no proof.SzG wrote:Contribution to chess has nothing to do with banning. He was banned for violating the charter.liuzy wrote:Since Norman has made great contribution to chess, I think it's time to let him return to our community.
You may notice that many here accused Ippolit and co. to be a clone without providing a proof. I don't remember any of them has been banned...
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
-
- Posts: 41473
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
That's a bit harsh Rolf.Rolf wrote: I would prefer Bloodgood as a chess expert over Kranium, who BTW is also playing around with many pseudos, and he is, above all, betraying chess fans with his clones. While Bloodgood didnt murder a chessplayer. So that one could argue that his chess dedication had absolutely nothing to do with chess! Other than with Kranium who abused chess fans themselves. That is why I see him a lot more dangerous than a murderer who sits forever in jail.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
- Posts: 6081
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 11:14 pm
- Location: Munster, Nuremberg, Princeton
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
Why?Graham Banks wrote:That's a bit harsh Rolf.Rolf wrote: I would prefer Bloodgood as a chess expert over Kranium, who BTW is also playing around with many pseudos, and he is, above all, betraying chess fans with his clones. While Bloodgood didnt murder a chessplayer. So that one could argue that his chess dedication had absolutely nothing to do with chess! Other than with Kranium who abused chess fans themselves. That is why I see him a lot more dangerous than a murderer who sits forever in jail.
A murderer in jail is harmless but a betrayer in freedom will always continie to commit fraud.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
-
- Posts: 41473
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
A lot of people are simply misguided with regards to the Ippo code and where it came from.Rolf wrote:Why?Graham Banks wrote:That's a bit harsh Rolf.Rolf wrote: I would prefer Bloodgood as a chess expert over Kranium, who BTW is also playing around with many pseudos, and he is, above all, betraying chess fans with his clones. While Bloodgood didnt murder a chessplayer. So that one could argue that his chess dedication had absolutely nothing to do with chess! Other than with Kranium who abused chess fans themselves. That is why I see him a lot more dangerous than a murderer who sits forever in jail.
A murderer in jail is harmless but a betrayer in freedom will always continie to commit fraud.
I'm sure that once the truth comes out, most will drop it like a hot potato.
It's the ones who still want to promote it and use it and deny its origins even after that, that we need to get rid of.
Just my opinion.
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
- Posts: 2801
- Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 3:53 pm
- Location: Denmark
- Full name: Damir Desevac
Re: Why not let Norman return to chess community
Mods, I think it is about time you stop sitting on your asses and ban Rolf and all others, who are making such outrageous accusations against a single individual.Rolf wrote:A damned untruth/halsehood. He wasnt banned for saying this but because he sold his several clones to the people and that is a crime. Therefore it's alsi in itself dirty to argue that he ported something to Windows and that were a fantastic contribution. This is similar (although one cannot compare the two cases!) to a murderer Bloodgood who spent a life sentence in jail and became a 1.g4 expert. IMO we cant ignore true crimes alone for the integrity of our youth. But honestly I would prefer Bloodgood as a chess expert over Kranium, who BTW is also playing around with many pseudos, and he is, above all, betraying chess fans with his clones. While Bloodgood didnt murder a chessplayer. So that one could argue that his chess dedication had absolutely nothing to do with chess! Other than with Kranium who abused chess fans themselves. That is why I see him a lot more dangerous than a murderer who sits forever in jail.SzG wrote:To be more precise, he kept saying Rybka was a clone but provided no proof.SzG wrote:Contribution to chess has nothing to do with banning. He was banned for violating the charter.liuzy wrote:Since Norman has made great contribution to chess, I think it's time to let him return to our community.
You may notice that many here accused Ippolit and co. to be a clone without providing a proof. I don't remember any of them has been banned...