Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 02:12:24 01/02/98
Go up one level in this thread
>Posted by Chris Whittington on January 01, 1998 at 14:56:22: >>>Incidentally snipping away an entire alternative explanation for the >>>Mchess SSDF results. >>Perhaps Mchess is a strong program? >Of course it is. That's what the argument is about. The standard view is >that it cooks its strength. I don't take the standard view. But strength >wasn't the snipped stuff, presumably you didn't read it. >>>>You and I (although commercial) in our hearts still are the same as many >>>>other chess programmers reading this message board. We have a passion >>>>for computer chess. That's one of the reasons why our programs are good >>>>and we still continue. We discuss topics here with heart and soul. >>>Fine, but not very meaningful, unless ...... >>Not very meaningful????????????? >>It's the HEART of this whole attack of yours! >Your opinions you call facts, and mine attacks. I have defended myself to your attacks. >>OTHERS can FREELY speak about any chess program and can say what they >>want. If I say something about "another" program should that be >>different >>because I happen to sell the program I have written? >Yes and no. I think we need to be careful for this reason (amongst >others). But it was you who started the "hidden book-learning" case in RGCC. Was that not allowed? Or did you just had something interesting to mention that was important to the computer chess community? Did anybody accuse you of mud-throwing on commercial opponents then? >>This is the WHOLE discussion in a nutshell. >Then we live in parallel universes. >>You say that because Jeroen quoted Sandro Necchi 2-3 times here this >>is an attack on Mchess. Perhaps Jeroen said it (and repeated it) to >>prove his point in a discussion? >>Ever heard of an opinion? >>Perhaps there was no "campaign" at all? >This is entirely possible. So sticking to this point instead of muddying >counter-attacks would have closed it earlier. If you say it is no >campaign. fair enough. But you didn't till now, just counterattacked >instead. I have defended myself to unfounded attacks. >>Ever considered that possibility? >Of course ..... >>And if you are wrong you are dead wrong, no? >No. There's a prima facie case for there being a campaign. patterns and >repetitions. Doesn't prove it, but indicates the possibility. Yeah, and made it a big topic with lots of allegations. You started the attack. I have tried to ignore. But you wouldn't let go. Which forced me to defend myself. >So you telling me there's no campaign ? Ok, fine, Marty Hirsch saya >Mchess is not targeted on specific opponents. I believe this and I'll >believe you. You say its just opinion expression, ok. >But one thing: don't claim that if program xyz creates a fixed book line >that causes program abc to fall over, that when abc counters this line >with variations in book to give rise to a line that abc wins; that >*each* program team is doing different things, xyz bad, and abc good. You should read the discussion of 1.5 year ago again. I haven't changed my mind about that ever since. I also have no regret I started that topic. You will have noticed that I am not willing to prove my point again and repeat the discussion of 1.5 year ago. It would have been easy for me as I have saved all data. You can figure out yourself the why. And I realize you perhaps have another explanation. Tempting? Fact is you hardly participate 1.5 year ago. Why now and not 1.5 year ago? >>So the key is what you are willing to believe. Apparently you have >>no high opinion of Jeroen. >Not so. You're adding to the broth some mud. Jeroen is ok by me. Arguing >with his opinions doesn't imply dislike. If you think Jeroen is ok why do you accuse him of starting a campaign? Ah, these patterns.... how could I forget..... >>Well, I have talked to Jeroen. He will never do it again. He with >>great care will talk about "other" programs because apparently it's >>risky to speak open-minded about computer topics because you easily >>can be associated with "commercial".... >Who's playing victim now, then ? I have defended myself. And will continue doing that till you stop. And I have asked you for that at least 2 times. You are not a somebody. You are Chris Whittington producer of CSTAL. If a company attacks me I take that serious and defend myself. >>Satisfied? >If we don't have to go through the same rigmarole next year, yes. Ah, another allegation.... >>And for your false accusations and the big topic you made out of it >>this still is a moderator case. >Well you know more than me there. I'm not in your agreement-clique. >Do your worst, Ed. I'm off on my holiday ....... I am not like that Chris. But thanks for the compliment. You have a nice holiday anyway. - Ed - >Chris Whittington
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.