Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 05:09:46 04/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2000 at 06:40:33, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: >On April 16, 2000 at 16:25:06, Bertil Eklund wrote: > >>On April 15, 2000 at 21:09:45, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On April 13, 2000 at 13:37:13, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>> >>>>On April 12, 2000 at 21:56:06, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>>>I suspect that Millennium GmbH would have an extremely tough time winning in >>>>>court against the SSDF if they did publish results for Genuis 6.5, WChess, etc. >>>>>Nonetheless, it appears that they feel that bullying independent citizen groups >>>>>is a successful marketing strategy. I can only shake my head. >>>> >>>>look : ssdf published results that are not played out on the base >>>>of a fair competition. the results have been influenced by the autoplayer >>>>device. >>> >>>As far as I can tell, the competition is fair. >>> >>>>millennium company has nothing against a fair competition. >>>>if the ssdf e.g. would (as they have done over the years with the dedicated >>>>machines) >>>>test by hand, nobody would complain. >>>>but they use the chessbase autoplayer device. >>>>the results of this device differ from the device other companies use. >>>>therefore the results are somehow irrelevant. >>>>but the ssdf do nowhere print in their publications that their results >>>>have been "arranged" or "generated" with the >>>>chessbase autoplayer device which is not generally trusted by agreement >>>>of all programmer paricipating in the list. >>> >>>Please list the names of chess program software developers who have programs on >>>the SSDF list but do not trust ChessBase's autoplayer in particular. >>> >>>>they do only publish numbers. stupid numbers. >>>>i see no other way for millennium company to forbid to publish those silly >>>>data, than threatening them. licence agreements in europe do count for swedish >>>>people to. you can believe me. it might be different in US, but many things >>>>are different in US. >>>> >>>>i would do exactly the same if it would be my product. >>>>if somebody would publish lies about my girl-friend or lies about my >>>>friends, he would get also similar kind of answer. >>>>printing lies is not a fair way of competition and not a fair way >>>>of an "independant organisation". >>>> >>>>>Dave >>> >>>You've accused Chessbase's autoplayer of distorting results in the past -- even >>>as long as two years ago -- and while you didn't post on that topic for a while, >>>it looks like you've jumped on that bandwagon again. Why don't you reply to >>>this message, and flat-out accuse ChessBase of writing autoplayer software that >>>fraudulently gives programs that are distributed by them an advantage? I can >>>only hope that they might then sue you for defamation, because then you might >>>learn from that experience that you should be more responsible about what you >>>say, and that you should either have actual facts to back up such a serious >>>allegation of mispropriety or not make it in the first place. >>> >>>Dave >> >>Hi! >> >>Read the excellent letters from Djordje and Enrique (in english) >>in Computerschach-forum >> >>http://www.computerschach.de/forum/index.html >> >>Bertil > >I am very sorry that this discussion was taken to another, unmoderated forum. I >got attacked in those postings and I don't quite understand why they were not >posted here. > One of these messages was posted here last night and I deleted it this morning, as it contained an insult. I assume that the insult was not intended, but was a case of unfamiliarity with an English expression. I invited the author to rephrase it and post it here again, but I don't know whether he will or not. >I am also very sorry that the authors of those postings apparently didn't get my >point of view and I am afraid that there is not much I can do about it. > >Stefan Andrew Williams CCC Moderator
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.