Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 15:52:38 05/04/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 1998 at 15:21:44, Bruce Moreland wrote: >That's where it has to start. The Swedish guys have built an >organization that provides a service. The might make mistakes, but they >are doing something constructive. This is relative IMO. If other people misuse the list , the quality of the MISTAKES gets multiplied. If I know that other people misuse my list for their commercial interests, I would give my best not to let them corrupt or interrupt my hobby. For how long did we complain that they should NOT count the doubles ?? For how long ?? Long before software was there. Since the old days of dedicated chess-computers. How succesful were our complains ? Pah - If it took ONE year to put hiarcs (after he won in munich the championship in the software category) on equal hardware , how BIG is the mistake ?? If I can read comments alike: we did not have to test it one best hardware since we knew that it would not be that strong. Or : we don't test it since it does not look strong enough. What shall I say ? I know that they are doing a good job. I know that they are doing it for fun. I know that they should get our support. In all kinds. But even when I made a computer-tournament in my past with dedicated machines I was able to a) write down all the game-scores b) made sure no game is repeated twice or more c) all data was saved on a disc or in ascii (it was before the PGN days). And this was long before SOFTWARE was "born" . >Those who call for the destruction of established volunteer >organizations need to understand that they might get what they call for, >since volunteers are less likely to do free stuff if a group of people >are violently crapping on them. I don't think that the comment of Thoralf (we don't like foreigners or how the comment was) was really a joke. We told them years over years that we could/would like to help them. Any tester produces data. The data is garbage and is needed to write an article. But if they don't want help... >I am certain that the Swedish list people aren't trying to manipulate >the list for anyone's benefit. They do not manipulate for purpose. They make system-immanent errors. End they do sometimes very strange decisions. When my work is not accurate, i should better not suggest by using big lists and statistics that it IS accurate. >They may have made a few mistakes. >They might make fewer mistakes if they charged $5000 per year per >program for testing. BRAVO. We should ask ChessBase to pay them $5000 for this job. (hint: this is sarcasm !) >Absent the soft rustling sound of cash pouring out of the sky on these >guys I would stop giving them any sort of hell for mistakes they might >make. They avoke that their list is a scientific approach to measure playing strength of chess programs. I doubt this. It is a list for fun. It is misused as THE list for buying decisions for customers. >Now, there is still the matter of arguing that people are annoying each >other with tricky little intrigues. Brilliant ! Conspiracy. Intrigues. Vendetta's. Brilliant. >Please remember that this has nothing to do with the Swedish list guys, >it has to do with people who have money and ego at stake. I don't have money. You talk about Ossi ? Or Fred ? Name them. I don't want to be in one group with them. >Nothing wrong with having money and ego at stake, by the way. >Trickly little intrigues are a different story. This post looks like a masterpiece of yours , Bruce... :-)) >I think it's wrong to call Ed and Ossi childish because they want fair >testing procedures. Perhaps it is possible to rumble about Ossi being >hypocritical, but the rumbling shouldn't be terribly loud, and in any >case it doesn't change the fact that at least part of his complaint is >on the money. > >If you guys are going to offer autoplayers, so the Swedish guys can use >them, it is probably best to offer them to the public, in my opinion. AHA! !! You understood the point ! I am really impressed ! AND WHY do you thing bruce, do the swedish guys have problems to understand these NORMAL and understandable complains ????? Intrique of you ? Money interest of you ? I would say: normal rational thinking. >I don't think the Fritz autoplayer cheats, but a team gains an advantage >if it can do lab testing of other programs, while the other teams can't >do this. BRAVO !! You got it too. Thats exactly our points. And WHY should the ChessBase team gain this advantage ALONE ? This was the matter of the open-letter to the ssdf. >I think that if anyone has an idea about thinking up a new trickly >little intrigue, they should stop immediately, because A) it's unfair, >and B) it brings down heat upon the Swedish list guys, who are doing you >the favor of giving you free testing and free effective advertising. So chessBase was wrong asking the ssdf-guys for EXCEPTION? This was contra productive because it put pressure on the ssdf-guys. Maybe it was ChessBase plan to do so ? Only god knows. >I think the Swedish list people should have a big discussion, try to >figure out how to address some of these issues while figuring out how >they can still have fun, announce any new policies that might result, >then listen with satisfaction to the sound of everyone else shutting up. > >bruce Most of the problems of the ssdf-guys are self-made. Their behaviour seen over the years can be taken as AUTARC or as arrogant or naive, depending on where you watch.
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.