Author: Mike Stoker
Date: 02:51:56 10/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On October 27, 1998 at 14:32:15, Roberto Waldteufel wrote: > >On October 26, 1998 at 09:30:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 25, 1998 at 10:01:21, Steven Schwartz wrote: >> >>>On October 25, 1998 at 07:04:26, Bert Seifriz wrote: >>> >>>>I disagree with you: >>>>1) You always write about support staff. Do you realize that >>>>chess software is very often a 1 man company. How >>>>could anybody have STAFF??? People would be happy >>>>to make a living for 1 person out of their work. >>>>There is NO support staff anywhere in the chess software >>>>world from what I see. >>>>2) You cannot even CONTACT some persons. Nobody >>>>on this forum knows where Richard Lang lives. I do not think >>>>that he has an email address, and if so he does not >>>>want to make it public. Same with some others. Now go to his >>>>producer and ask there, sometimes they can/will help, sometimes >>>>not. >>>>3) You get answers from some programmers or >>>>some dealers sometimes, but very often you get nothing. >>>>ChessBase IS a company. On RGCC I read that they do >>>>not answer emails very often. >>>>Mindscape IS a company. Now ask them something about >>>>Chessmaster, and you will not find much help from >>>>the support staff there. >>>> >>>>4) And by the way, the support staff of other >>>>non-chess companies is very often also very bad! >>>> >>>>So I see no reason why a problem which affects >>>>many OR ONLY 5 people in the world should not >>>>be discussed here as long as it is chess software >>>>related. >>>>Bert/gambitsoft.com >>> >>>I agree with Bert here. I have seen 20 years in this business, >>>and the collective support offered by the majority of computer >>>chess manufacturers is very sub-standard. >>> >>>That, of course, has put the full burden of support on the >>>retailers like us who have had to dissect the problem and devise a >>>solution without any help from the people who actually >>>manufactured the chess computer or chess software in the >>>first place. >>> >>>Ed is a breath of fresh air. It is obvious that he cares about >>>his programs and wishes to solve their problems as they arise. >>>He is even willing to come to our CCC forum and help his dealers >>>support his product. I believe that what we have collectively >>>created here is something that can benefit the entire chess >>>community. In my opinion, it would be wrong to put a stop to it. >>> >>>Having said that... I would like to add two more items: >>> 1) By singling Ed out, I do not meant to slight all of the >>>programmers that we see here in CCC on a daily basis sharing >>>their thoughts with us. We all know who they are and they should >>>be thanked as well. >>> 2) I, personally, have no problem with support questions here >>>in CCC, but I am not too sure that I will continue to be in favor >>>of them if we start getting dozens of questions like "Ed, which way do >>>I hold the CD when inserting it into the CD player.":-))) >>> >>>For the first time in weeks I can clearly see the vision of a good >>>poll question. All we need to do is formulate the possible answers. >>>Proposed question: >>>"To what degree are you in favor of or against the use of the CCC >>>to discuss/respond to technical questions?" >>>Proposed answers: >>>????? >>>- Regards, Steve (ICD/Your Move) >> >> >>I have a problem with it in its present form, because it can easily hit over >>50% of the total volume of posts. Here is what I would suggest, as a *much* >>better alternative: >> >>How about help "links" for each program, perhaps listed at the top of the normal >>CCC screen, such as "Rebel help" "chessbase/fritz help" "junior help" and so >>forth? that keeps all the help questions out of here so that we can have a >>"clean" computer chess discussion environment. Then anyone interested can >>click on "rebel help" to see what kinds of discussion are going on there. I >>don't mind help questions, but can guarantee you that if we didn't have the >>crafty mailing list and my email address public, it could add another 100+ posts >>*per day* here. We really don't need that. If we need a "crafty help" link, >>that's ok. I'll check it constantly. But it is painful to have to wade thru >>dozens of such posts here. Painful enough that it may well tend to cause >>reduced discussion about the actual topic of "computer chess". >> >>Then we might have a "chess programming" topic, a "chess problem positions" >>topic, and so forth, to let folks read what they are interested in without >>having to stomp thru a bunch of other stuff... > >I think this would be an excellent idea. I don't know how difficult it would be >to do it, but I am sure that CCC would be a better forum as a result. I >especially like the "chess programming" topic.... :-) > >Roberto I agree totally. I find it very difficult searching through all the requests for assistance on using chess programs, to find the juicy postings on chess programming techniques. An alternative method would be for each posting to have a category attached, and the facility to filter by these categories from within the existing filter screen. In this way, one would see all postings they were interested at once, but none of the ones they weren't. Might also be nice to split the chess programming up into Conventional brute force techniques, and a seperate section on AI techniques. Hopefully this would encourage more discussion on the latter! Mike.
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.