Mega only appeared after the conversation stopped because the only way E could defend his position was by misrepresenting my arguments and deliberately answering incorrect posts. Or maybe he's so useless he didn't know he was doing that. At this point I don't know, but E trolled the conversation and then Mega appeared.
Ok and ? Mega pretty much ignores both you and eroch he pretty much mostly cares about correcting txgcx I doubt mega appeared just to help e
Illogic.
tygxc's illogic.
Illogic is the term.
Does even illogic have its own internal logic?
Yes. But its still illogic.
------------------------------------
Do several people here have insights into tygxc's illogic?
Definitely.
They might and do qualify it differently - but there's general consensus.
He's pushing illogic.
Why?
What will happen if this whole process continues here for another ten years? I'm not sure of tygxc's age.
But if he has lots of living time left -
then the effects of the forum might eventually lead to some self-discovery by him. And discovery of other things. By him.
Like the generic side of logic and math and science.
And that logic not only binds math together and binds science together ...
but logic also binds them together and with each other.
----------------------------------
when there's arguments between those that deny science/logic and those that recognize reality ... one often then sees arguments about 'rules of logic' and what logic is.
In other words - even with logic as with science - deniers will try to put a box around it. Their box. Their rules.
And then from there - argue from their invalid premises.
While projecting what they do.
Goes on constantly on the website.
---------------------------------------------
Does tygxc believe his own illogic?
Always an issue with many pushing overt denials and distortions ... and trolling too.
But there's a general pattern ...
oscillation between self-belief and deceit.
Why? How?
Because of imperative compulsion.
Whoever - begins not to care whether he/she believes his/her own nonsense or not.
And has already committed into not even considering or being aware as to whether he/she so believes his/her illogic and denials and disinformation and projections and lies and other falsehoods.
That grows on them.
Becomes more and more obvious.
Only someone who believes what they are saying could commit as much as tygxc does. sI believe that someone trolling would also not react as tygxc does to the more blunt examples of his illogic.
I made an argument about the odds of repeated even numbers of errors occurring. I pointed out the difficulties since there's no error profile available UNTIL chess is solved. Exactly one hour later E made that point and accused me of not understanding it. I mean, that's completely hopeless of him. We have to go with the facts as they stand and we know that he has used stochastic arguments when it suits him and now he was opposing one because it didn't suit him. So E had already completely lost the argument but of course, his henchment weren't capable of realising he'd lost it. And since then he's obviously been floundering and only kept afloat by the heroic attempts of some sheep. I pointed out that he's a troll and he actually claimed that he had approached Ghostess who had confirmed that she really likes him and doesn't dislike him at all. He just isn't honest and neither, it seems, are you.
I made an argument about the odds of repeated even numbers of errors occurring. I pointed out the difficulties since there's no error profile available UNTIL chess is solved. Exactly one hour later E made that point and accused me of not understanding it. I mean, that's completely hopeless of him. We have to go with the facts as they stand and we know that he has used stochastic arguments when it suits him and now he was opposing one because it didn't suit him. So E had already completely lost the argument but of course, his henchment weren't capable of realising he'd lost it. And since then he's obviously been floundering and only kept afloat by the heroic attempts of some sheep. I pointed out that he's a troll and he actually claimed that he had approached Ghostess who had confirmed that she really likes him and doesn't dislike him at all. He just isn't honest and neither, it seems, are you.
Well everyone except for like 3 people here is a troll
I'm not arguing against wether or not E is a troll but antagonizing trolls that like to troll feed is a bit of a mystery to me
I made an argument about the odds of repeated even numbers of errors occurring. I pointed out the difficulties since there's no error profile available UNTIL chess is solved. Exactly one hour later E made that point and accused me of not understanding it. I mean, that's completely hopeless of him. We have to go with the facts as they stand and we know that he has used stochastic arguments when it suits him and now he was opposing one because it didn't suit him. So E had already completely lost the argument but of course, his henchment weren't capable of realising he'd lost it. And since then he's obviously been floundering and only kept afloat by the heroic attempts of some sheep. I pointed out that he's a troll and he actually claimed that he had approached Ghostess who had confirmed that she really likes him and doesn't dislike him at all. He just isn't honest and neither, it seems, are you.
and who is e
Only someone who believes what they are saying could commit as much as tygxc does. sI believe that someone trolling would also not react as tygxc does to the more blunt examples of his illogic.
Completely agree. He isn't trolling. Looking at his answers to requests for help from chess players, regarding playing methodology, he tries his best to help. He's probably a more experienced chess player than I am and I have played in maybe 100 tournaments and won rather a lot of them. I have captained our club team to first division titles in quite strong leagues more than once and have played top board for county teams winning our national county championships. Yet I suspect that tygxc has been a stronger player than I and that he has more experience than I.
He can be out of his depth in this milieu but I wouldn't blame anyone who is out of their depth. There are trolls about ... very obviously here on this thread. Such people make open and honest exchanges of views impossible because they only want to win and to impose their views on others. They are not interested in any exchange of views because it threatens them. It is quite natural that some people will feel threatened in such an environment. So long as this trolling, by those whose views you support, goes on, tygxc cannot be blamed for ANY response he chooses to make. He should be supported rather than attacked and made fun of by weak people. He has demonstrated very great courage and fortitude and I for one respect him.
I made an argument about the odds of repeated even numbers of errors occurring. I pointed out the difficulties since there's no error profile available UNTIL chess is solved. Exactly one hour later E made that point and accused me of not understanding it. I mean, that's completely hopeless of him. We have to go with the facts as they stand and we know that he has used stochastic arguments when it suits him and now he was opposing one because it didn't suit him. So E had already completely lost the argument but of course, his henchment weren't capable of realising he'd lost it. And since then he's obviously been floundering and only kept afloat by the heroic attempts of some sheep. I pointed out that he's a troll and he actually claimed that he had approached Ghostess who had confirmed that she really likes him and doesn't dislike him at all. He just isn't honest and neither, it seems, are you.
and who is e
'im. 
I made an argument about the odds of repeated even numbers of errors occurring. I pointed out the difficulties since there's no error profile available UNTIL chess is solved. Exactly one hour later E made that point and accused me of not understanding it. I mean, that's completely hopeless of him. We have to go with the facts as they stand and we know that he has used stochastic arguments when it suits him and now he was opposing one because it didn't suit him. So E had already completely lost the argument but of course, his henchment weren't capable of realising he'd lost it. And since then he's obviously been floundering and only kept afloat by the heroic attempts of some sheep. I pointed out that he's a troll and he actually claimed that he had approached Ghostess who had confirmed that she really likes him and doesn't dislike him at all. He just isn't honest and neither, it seems, are you.
Well everyone except for like 3 people here is a troll
I'm not arguing against wether or not E is a troll but antagonizing trolls that like to troll feed is a bit of a mystery to me
I'm not a troll. tygxc isn't. I'm hoping mega isn't. You're behaving like one though. It's like you make random attacks on either side. That isn't balanced, since the attacks you make are random and usually have no justification.
Also, it's best to avoid trolls but in this case there are no more than about three of them and they have taken over this thread and are basically using it to promote their own agenda. Elroch has banned from his threads anyone who challenges him and yet he has a compulsive desire or need for confrontation and to manipulate people. He is going to argue outside his threads to get that, since everyone who ever argues with him has been expelled from them. It's a person, trying to pretend to himself that he's strong and capable. Maybe that's what all trolls are. Challenging them may seem to give them what they want but what they want even more is to be able to bully people at whim and never be challenged because those they bully think it isn't worth challenging them. I'm exploring how to use these rules of Ches.com, which seem to disempower victims so much and aid the trolls, rather than to be a victim of the rules, so that others will benefit from what I'm trying to do. The internet, like it or not, is with us and is important. There are those who are adept at using it to manipulate others and I am interested in finding how it may best be prevented. Ultimately, I think by means of genuinely AI bots which are capable of recognising veiled threats and deception.
No you wouldn't, since you are not capable of understanding anything remotely novel and creatively interesting. Neither are you the only inept person round here, with a tendency towards would-be despotism.
Dodging the point entirely, as you are wont to do whenever you don't have an answer.
There was no point. You're effectively a child who cannot construct even a meaningful critisism. I can't answer a point where it doesn't exist.
There was no point. You're effectively a child who cannot construct even a meaningful critisism. I can't answer a point where it doesn't exist.
Average highschool level trashtalk
I'm not a troll.
...there's that lack of self awareness again.
@Optimissed, I understand the relationship between chalk and cheese.
It is that chalk is chalk and cheese is cheese.
Likewise for science and mathematical propositions. They do not overlap.
This person is just the same.
Science has its rules and procedures. It consists of a systematic fixing of variables to discover relationships between them. Mathematics is an ideal too which is used to manipulate data in engineering and scientific projects among others, to render it into a useable mode. Yet neither depends on the other since science can be carried out with no more than simple arithmetic, as I pointed out.
But chess cannot be turned into a set of equations. Therefore, maths can have no bearing on solving chess, except statistically and tygxc's argument was statistically based. I do not think that most of the world is going to trust this person's judgement. I may be biassed but I actually think I'm reacting rationally to a person who does not come across as someone who can apply maths to science. Solving chess is a scientific project, not a mathematical one. If you can't understand the reasons why that is so, then you aren't thinking. Six years agio I was thinking that maybe chess solving is a mathematical project. But I was wrong.
There was no point. You're effectively a child who cannot construct even a meaningful critisism. I can't answer a point where it doesn't exist.
Not only can I construct one...I can also spell the word.
You are completely bereft of any notion of how to solve chess, middlegame or otherwise. That's the point, and it's one you will not be able to refute.
There was no point. You're effectively a child who cannot construct even a meaningful critisism. I can't answer a point where it doesn't exist.
Not only can I construct one...I can also spell the word.
You are completely bereft of any notion of how to solve chess, middlegame or otherwise. That's the point, and it's one you will not be able to refute.
You make quite a lot of typos and especially grammatical errors. I'm not childish enough to want to draw your attention to them. That was a typo. That's the sort of childishness you rely on. Or was it a joke?
You are bereft of any sense of reality, so that makes it even. Does it? Well, maybe not.
There was no point. You're effectively a child who cannot construct even a meaningful critisism. I can't answer a point where it doesn't exist.
Not only can I construct one...I can also spell the word.
You are completely bereft of any notion of how to solve chess, middlegame or otherwise. That's the point, and it's one you will not be able to refute.
You make quite a lot of typos and especially grammatical errors. I'm not childish enough to want to draw your attention to them. That was a typo. That's the sort of childishness you rely on. Or was it a joke?
You are bereft of any sense of reality, so that makes it even. Does it? Well, maybe not.
Now if I got a nickle for every typo I made ...
Also I did set out a strategy for creating algorithms to solve the middle game, several years ago. The words I used may have been too long for you.
Mega only appeared after the conversation stopped because the only way E could defend his position was by misrepresenting my arguments and deliberately answering incorrect posts. Or maybe he's so useless he didn't know he was doing that. At this point I don't know, but E trolled the conversation and then Mega appeared.