Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Moderation: Nothing wrong with the thread

Author: Hermano Ecuadoriano

Date: 19:22:12 12/15/00

Go up one level in this thread


On December 15, 2000 at 22:02:10, Mogens Larsen wrote:

>On December 15, 2000 at 21:36:45, Michael Cummings wrote:
>
>>There is no accusation, there is an assumption that maybe something is wrong,
>>but then again you can say this for anything.
>
>So everyone can say what they want to as long as there's an assumption that
>maybe something could possibly be wrong. No, that's not how it works.


"Something could possibly be wrong" with the Chessbase Winboard adapter.
Delete THIS thread?
I rest my case.


>
>>Its not just Rebel that has has problems with the SSDF, I can recall in the back
>>of my mind, programs like Shredder also did.
>
>That is beside the point.
>
>>I will also state, like I have many times in the past that the list means little
>>to me unless all top programs are tested. But then again it has been explained
>>to me why this cannot be and I have accpeted that.
>
>I don't care about the list either, but that is also beside the point.
>
>>But what is the problem with what he said. The only thing that could come close
>>to something being negative is the following
>>
>>
>>"I may not have the proof of any wrong doing, or unfair testing, but
>>I do think that their list could & should be more accurate than it is
>>and I'll leave it at that."
>>
>>This is not slander, liable for nothing.
>
>You're quoting the wrong piece of the message. The important bit was:
>
>"Now I wonder does Mr. Schroder Know the first rule in dealing w/ the devil ??".
>
>That is equivalent to slander. Consistant with what Eriq casually mentioned in
>another thread without proof:
>
>"Maybe the tester are just cheating the rebel team again. I mean
>how often have weird result pop up in the past with the ssdf that
>no one but them can reproduce !!!"
>
>Making accusations and admitting that there's no proof isn't acceptable
>argumentation. The purpose was quite obvious, so your estimation isn't correct.
>
>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.