Author: Chris Whittington
Date: 15:37:34 12/30/97
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 1997 at 16:44:21, Jeroen Noomen wrote: > >>But my concern over the Mchess demolition remains. > >There is no demolition, just the mentioning of facts. > >>1. It appears to be established on these news groups that Mchess is much >>weaker than its SSDF grading because of 'special' techniques of killer >>books and so on. I don't think anyone has used the word cheating, but >>that is what is implied. And I use the word 'established' because of >>various comments by various infrequent posters who refer to Mchess in >>this way as if it is an article of faith that its books are cooked. > >Nowhere has been said 'much weaker'. The programs in the top five/six >are >all strong enough, there is not much difference as I said before. > >>2. IMO the references to these cooked lines were started by people >>associated with Rebel. I guess I may be wrong, but that's the impression >>that I have, not entirely Rebel but certainly a sizeable part of it. >>Certainly the constant repetition of the statement by Sandro Necchi >>comes from the Rebel team. > >Which is a fact, so what's wrong to mention this? > >>3. I remain to be convinced that the Mchess team is doing anything >>wrong, or anything different to anybody else. >> >>4. Therefore I see the continuing attacks as unfair and unreasonable. > >Which attacks? You make it an attack! There were only facts, starting >by the thread written by Thorsten. > >>5. I then ask myself why they continue, and who is continuing them, and >>to whose benefit is it to trash Mchess ? > >Again such a word: 'trash'. These are your words and you simply step >aside >as soon as facts are brought in. You are not reacting to facts >mentioned. >As far as I am concerned nobody's 'trashed'. And nobody will be. But >still >such topics can be discussed, there is nothing wrong with that. > >>6. Since my speciality is defending the apparently undefendable, and >>being the lone voice of disagreement; I take a certain pleasure in >>challenging you and all the others. There, see, I admit to impure >>motives :) A purer motive is that the guy was in apparent trouble last >>year with his distributor not paying him, we heard stories that he took >>on a job outside of chess programming, and I don't like to see someone >>who is down being kicked. > >Completely agreed! > > >>1. Well, the Rebel team does seem to attack Mchess. My opinion, but it >>seems so. > >Which is not the case. MCP is a great program, I play with it very >often. >But the above statement remains and is also confirmed by others. If only >I would mention it you could use the word 'attack'. But read magazines >like CSS and Computerschaak and you will read others saying the same as >I did. (If you can't read them, start learning Dutch and German :)))) > >>2. Are your motives pure ? I don't know you very well either, so I ask > >My 'motive' is to stress a fact. Like journalists do. Others agree. You >make it an 'attack' instead of analysing the facts. You don't react on >the facts. That's a pity IMO. > >>3. It seems like a campaign to me. > >Nope. It's discussing a fact that has been found out (also) by others. > >>>We met a few times at AEGON and laughed about specific things and it was >>>fun meeting you but for the rest you know zero about me and my or >>>Jeroens >>>motives and I wish you stop with this. >> >>Right now the position is confused. We can stop in the fog, or we can >>clear it. One possibility would be to accept the Mchess clarification >>and withdraw the allegations. > >There are no allegations. Once again: facts! A fact cannot be withdrawn. > >>Another would be to challenge the Mchess statement. >> >>I really don't see how it can be left as is. I mean is he cooking books >>or not ? Its quite a serious allegation, no ? > >Which was confirmed by one of the team-members.... > >Chris, I feel that it is a pity you pointed an interesting discussion >in such a direction. Well, you see, I feel it is such a pity you pointed it in the direction of a specific programming team. Anyway, your view is clear and fixed, Mchess has stated its position. I prefer to err on the side on non-suspicion as to intention, but, as is clear, we live in a suspicious community. Chris Whittington > Still, I wish you a happy 1998 as I wish everybody >here at CCC al the best for the next year! > >Best regards, Jeroen
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.