Author: Paul Petersson
Date: 22:12:28 05/08/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 1998 at 19:24:54, Detlef Pordzik wrote: >Dear Paul, > >hope, you don't mind I snipped the rest of the to and fro stuff - it's >known by now. > OK >>>See : here's the difference. >>>We won't be able to argue that out - >>>you got your opinion, I got mine - noone has a real proof, pityfully. >>>So the whole thing remains spectaculative.... >>> >> >>It really doesn´t have to be unless you want it to be. Your suspicion >>that CB gave the SSDF a different autoplayer than Enrique, I find a bit >>paranoid. Ed could send the same specialversion of Rebel to us to verify >>if he´d like. But if you don´t trust us than none of this will satisfy >>you, I guess. > > >Who is " us " I should trust in, Paul ?? The "us" I was refering to is the SSDF, and I didn´t say that you should trust us! That´s up to you. But since I is one of the testers in SSDF, who have done a large part of testing with Fritz 5, I don´t take it very lightly when I hear people saying things like "SSDF accepted CB hardware". SSDF never accepted any hardware from CB, only a non-public (software)autoplayer. > And I really think it ain't too polite - not at all, to be precise - to >name >somebody elses opinion " a bit paranoid " - >I think you know the original meaning of this phrase, do you ? You should read my postings more carefully. Only someone who believed that CB gave Enrique and the SSDF different autoplayers would be a bit paranoid. But you don´t *really* believe that do you? Because that would suggest that the SSDF and CB was in some form of conspiracy against the rest of the computerchessworld. Otherwise CB would have been caught had Ed tested his special Rebel with the SSDF. You wouldn´t want to suggest such a conspiracy would you? *That* wouldn´t be nice. I am really surprised that someone that says that he is interested in the truth shows so little enthusiasm when a opportunity to settle this suddenly appears. I would have expected the opposite. > >A guy of 46 should have the right for an own opinion ; right or wrong - >I'm so long in this scene, that I'm willing to believe - nearly anything >good or bad - as commercial interests have reached a volume today, >which in no way compares to the 80ies. I´m pretty suspicious myself, but I would like some hard facts before I start makeing conspiracy theories. > >I don't " believe " this or the other - to point this out explicit for >you once more - >I just got my personal doubts - not less, not more. >And these doubts have only and exeptionally appeared because of the very > unusual treatment of CB thru' the SSDF, period. > >In opposition - as it seems - I very well can accept the other sight >than mine - but, as said, unfortunately an uncomfortable feeling will >remain for >me, just personally. >And I feel free to name this - as allways - lound 'n clear. You shouldn´t be so upset then if you got a little flak from others with different oppinions! > >And that's just it, Paul - you see ? As clearly as a newborn kitten. :) Paul > >>>Vist his site.....to get an overview of his opinion for yourself. >> >>I think I know his opinion in these matters very well, and I respect it >>very much. He has more or less accepted that booking is a reality that´s >>difficult to completely protect against. He wants the CB autoplayer to >>be public, and so do I. This will hopefully happen in a not to distant >>future. >> >>Paul > >ELVIS
This page took 0.02 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.