Author: KarinsDad
Date: 11:05:24 09/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 28, 1999 at 13:41:26, robert michelena wrote: >To all those trying to whitewash chessbase and the swedish meatball league, let >me suggest that when the swedish meatball organization relegates all chessbase >programs to the faster computers, while at the same time, leaving the non >chessbase programs to the slower computer, that suggests, at the least, >something improper going on. > >If the chessbase programs were the only viable programs, that would be one >thing. But to suggest that Rebel, Chessmaster, Tiger and Shredder are inferior >and not worthy of having their strengths tested on faster computers, is, to be >quite frank with all of you, simply not credible. As a former assistant >prosecutor, I can assure you that there is sufficient, credible circumstantial >evidence to raise doubt as to the honesty of the swedish organization. > >And do remember the old adage, " where there's smoke, there's fire." My sister is an assistant prosecutor and she sees conspiracies in the bushes as well. The point is not whether an impropriety was done. The point was that the evidence is circumstantial at best. As a "former" assistant prosecutor, you of all people should know that circumstantial evidence is not sufficient. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you view it), we live in an open society where innuendo and suspicion can be directed at someone without the person directing it being accountable for their statements, but the person or organization who is being targeted has to defend themselves. This is especially true on an open forum such as CCC. You stated in your post that "to suggest that Rebel, Chessmaster, Tiger and Shredder are inferior and not worthy of having their strengths tested on faster computers, is, to be quite frank with all of you, simply not credible". Who suggested this? Who claimed that not being choosen is due to a product being inferior? Or was this an assumption of your own based on which programs were picked for the faster systems? It is just as reasonable to believe that they picked the top four autoplayer capable programs on the previous list as it is to believe that they purposely picked four ChessBase programs. To my knowledge, both of these are true, so either reason (or both) could be true. When you have some facts to support your suspicions and your circumstantial evidence, please be so kind as to enlighten the rest of us. Thanks, KarinsDad :) PS. As a moderator, I am just as annoyed at the accusatory statements towards the SSDF and Chessbase as I am at an accusatory statement towards an individual member here. I was going to respond to some of the other posts on this subject, but your post just happened to be the one I picked. Uh uh. I smell a conspiracy just against you and not against the other posters who accused the SSDF of wrongdoing (sorry, I couldn't resist after your "swedish meatball" crack).
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.