Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: SSDF and the autoplayer

Author: Ed Schröder

Date: 00:31:48 11/10/98

Go up one level in this thread


>>Some people need a long time to do something normal.
>>ChessBase took months to decide something that is obvious.
>>The damage that they have done to computerchess is IMO very big.
>>and cannot be taken back soon.

>I hope that some kind of revenge factor does not play into Ed’s decision when to
>put auto player support back into Rebel 10. He has enough pissed off customers
>as it is, and the sooner we can put this mess behind us the better. I know that
>some programmers do not care about their customer base, but I think that Ed
>does, and I hope he will do the right thing A.S.A.P. Because it is not SSDF that
>pays the bills, it is his customer base.

I can assure you no revenge or similar feelings are involved in my decision. I
just have practical objections.

As you all know I have argued against hidden autoplayers. This from February
till August/September. In public as well in email with the SSDF. I then dropped
the whole issue as no compromise was hanging in the air as the SSDF rejected
my wish to exclude hidden autoplayers for future testing.

So Rebel10 was released without auto232 based on the above.

I am not prepared to make a patch for a) reasons of time b) costs.

I am not prepared to trash all Rebel10 cdroms in my office. I am not
prepared to make costs for a new master and have the thing duplicated
another xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx times because it took the SSDF 8-9 months to
come to the same conclusion I have argued for so long. The (good) news
just came one month too late.

- Ed -




This page took 0.01 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.