Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 09:16:59 04/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 12, 2000 at 10:28:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 12, 2000 at 04:54:39, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On April 12, 2000 at 03:51:56, Ritter Rost wrote: >> >>>>And I'm just saying again, "What does it matter to you?" >>> >>>I am interested in an independent and strong SSDF which does not have to fear >>>legal threats if they want to publish test results. This matters a lot to me. >>> >>>>Are you being bullied or prosecuted - No >>>>Are the people being "bullied & prosecuted" publishing the results anyway - Yes. >>> >>>No they are not. See several posts of Bertil Eklunds on the matter. Ossi Weiner >>>forbade them to publish the results of Genius, Zarkov and WChess. >>> >>> >>>>My view from here is you are Anonomously trying to bring a private conflict into >>>>a public forum. >>> >>>For computer chess the authenticity and independence of the SSDF as the only >>>major testing institution is not a private matter. Nor is the behaviour of the >>>major software publishers. >>> >>>> >>>>The major achievement of this is a lot of discussion about the legality of your >>>>original post & the possibility that CCC or the Moderators could be in legal >>>>trouble because of Your post. >>> >>>CCC is a healthy, strong and commercially independent forum which can survive a >>>little controversy as long as it remains free of _personal_ attacks, Tina. Some >>>excitement here and there may even help to raise the number of visits/members. >>> >>>Furthermore there is no need to refer to my unthoughtful original post which has >>>been thankfully deleted. I am simply quoting SSDF member Bertil Eklund in this >>>thread. >>> >>>Bottom line: I would like the SSDF to be allowed to publish all test results. At >>>the moment this is not the case. Bertil Eklund said that Ossi Weiner asked them >>>to suppress the results of Genius, Zarkov and WChess, >>> >>>Ritter >> >>I agree with your entire post. >> >>What I don't understand is why Ossi doesn't want the results of these programs >>published. They're all strong programs and I expect they would all end up within >>a few points of the top program. It seems like that would be terrific >>advertising for Ossi & co. >> >>-Tom > > >If you read the email posted here, the answer is obvious. He believes that >the auto232 software gives programs the opportunity to bias the results by >various means (several have reported moves played under auto232 that are >absolutely impossible to reproduce in testing.) I did read the e-mail, but I dismissed the reason as BS. If Ossi was really so pissed about autoplayer trickery, he wouldn't have eventually allowed Shredder's results in the list. And if I were him and I was convinced cheating was going on, I would raise the issue (LOUDLY) in a public forum. If I had solid evidence, a lot of people would get pissed at my competition... -Tom
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.