Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:27:53 03/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2001 at 13:54:25, Fabio Lopez wrote: >>He was simply pointing out that these posts generally lead to long discussions >>that prove _nothing_ since Deep Blue is not currently available to play games >>anywhere. > >Deep Blue is not available so we shouldn't feature it in any discussion? >I don't see any logic there. Following your logic, perhaps we should keep our >discussions restricted to Crafty and Tiger then, as they're available. It depends on _how_ the discussion starts. If someone asks "Can someone explain how DB used 480 chess processors?" then that discussion is of general interest and will be interesting. If someone asks "Why is DB hiding?" that is more inflammatory and will cause long flaming threads... > >>It was a reasonable question for him to ask. It is a good way to simply stir >>up trouble >There's nothing to indicate that he was trying to stir up trouble. > >> as Deep Blue discussions bring all the rats out of the woodwork. >Whoever these people that you've branded as rats are, I'm sure they have a right >to have their say and discuss anything related to computer chess. Just start an acrimonious thread about DB and see who the "rats" are. Then you will see my point. This _has_ happened many times in the past.
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.