Author: Albert Silver
Date: 16:32:33 09/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 2000 at 18:19:25, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>On September 06, 2000 at 16:23:08, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>"Well, if you want to offer your services for a price then it's your decision.
>>In my case I would see it as immoral because chess software is a hobby, not a
>>carrer move."
>>
>>http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?128380
>
>So? There's a difference between offering your services for a prize and
>volunteering. The latter being my case, which I refer to, where deciding that
>the software isn't enough for my work would be immoral. Rather simple IMHO.
>
>>I do. I don't see how morals come in here. How on earth is making money off of
>>something you enjoy as a hobby immoral? It must be everyone's dream to be
>>immoral then. Either that or you have a very negative view on what constitutes
>>work, as opposed to a hobby since it would seem that one's work cannot be one's
>>hobby.
>
>There's nothing wrong with making money of oneøs hobby, but if that's the
>driving factor then you're off track IMO. And no, hobby can't be one's work.
>That's the definition of the word hobby, otherwise you would apply the term
>"work".
>
>>"As I said before, if you choose to offer your services as betatester/developer
>>stating your ambition clearly about revealing your ideas and thoughts only in
>>exchange of money, then it's fine with me. I doubt the persons phone lines will
>>be buzzing with activity though. It's the implied lack of willingness to part
>>with all information unless you get a paycheck as well that bothers me.
>>Especially if you offer your services for free and voluntarily. I also take
>>offense to the suggested lack of enthusiasm as a result of not getting paid.
>>
>>There are obviously a few people here, who think highly of their capabilities in
>>this particular field. And most of them needs to have their sense of reality
>>adjusted slightly, preferably recalibrated. Fortunately, it's very funny to
>>read."
>>
>>The "As I said before" was in reference to a response of yours to a post by Uri,
>>so who else should I believe you are referring to?
>
>I didn't make any reference to the quality of Uri's work effort in the quotation
>and it would most likely be superior to anything I might offer for free. If you
>actually read what you quote, it should be quite clear from the context that I
>refer to the likelihood of someone choosing a tester, who'll do it for money, as
>opposed to someone doing it for free, as slim *sigh*. Again, I suggest reading
>the entire thread and something might reveal itself.
The entire thread? C'mon... You say one thing, referring to a specific post and
line of argument, and follow this up with another statement that I am somehow
supposed to have guessed is completely unrelated?
>
>I'm getting the impression judging from your reply that you just want to argue
>instead of presenting valid views or questions.
Yes, that must be it. My views on beta-testing, program development,
remuneration, work, and hobbies aren't valid, therefore I'm just arguing for
argument's sake. I'd still like to know why you believe that one's work and
one's hobby are mutually exclusive. I don't think that is necessarily so BTW,
but perhaps I'm just an optimist. Judging from the reply, I presume you'd rather
just let the subject drop, which is fine, but at least be clear about it rather
than dismiss what I have to say as lacking validity.
Albert Silver
>If that's the case, find someone
>else to bother. Otherwise, I would like to get paid ;o).
>
>Mogens.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.