Author: Christopher R. Dorr
Date: 13:25:56 09/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
By all means, please post your proof on here. If proof does not exist, then please retract your accusations. I have nothing to do with ChessBase of the SSDF, but I bristle when I see an unfair and unsupported allegation like this made in public. These kinds of inflammatory and unsupported posts are one reason I left RGCC. If there is proof, then present it. If there is not proof, then please do not accuse anybody of illegal or unethical activities. If you do not like ChessBase or the SSDF, then that is fine. Accusing them without any proof *at all* is another matter enirely, and is completely unacceptable. Christopher Dorr On September 27, 1999 at 07:55:45, Ratko V Tomic wrote: >> The problem, and I think they are going to receive complains >> about this, is that the 4 programs tested on K6-450 ALL COME >> FROM CHESSBASE. > >Which probably donated hardware and software for exactly this reason, >at least to the key SSDF decision makers. How convenent, right for >the Christmas shopping season. Even without this latest blatant >blunder, if you read the SSDF response to the complaints about using >the CB proprietary autoplayer it becomes clear who is it really that >SSDF serves. If doctors can be bought by pharmaceutical companies >with few days of vacations in resorts and cruise ships, why couldn't >be chess players with fast computers and chess software. (After all, >chess players don't make an integrity oath and on average make less >than doctors, so statistically they ought to be easier to buy and >would cost less to stay bought.) > >SSDF has really gone overboard with the corruption in the latest >several lists. The time is ripe for a new CC evaluation group to >rise and serve the chess playing public.
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.