Author: Andreas Stabel
Date: 07:09:09 11/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 01, 2000 at 06:20:44, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 01, 2000 at 04:35:35, Andreas Stabel wrote: > >>On October 31, 2000 at 18:23:35, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>On October 31, 2000 at 07:06:36, Andreas Stabel wrote: >>> >>>>On October 31, 2000 at 00:28:55, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 30, 2000 at 22:49:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 30, 2000 at 21:30:09, Bruce Moreland wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>I just went and checked to see what Crafty has been doing recently, and it has >>>>>>>been idle for 44 minutes. It has played four games in the past eight hours. It >>>>>>>has played seven games so far today and it played eight yesterday. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It doesn't seem that you need to worry that much about people hogging it. If >>>>>>>Crafty has been idle for 45 minutes, why not play against a Tiger? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>This is not real common. And Murphy's law often strikes. IE I logged on >>>>>>Friday and had two different complaints from humans that got interrupted. >>>>> >>>>>Just checked again and guess what? Idle: 44 >>>>> >>>>>bruce >>>> >>>>What's itching you. There are litterally tens of craftys you can play any >>>>time. There is scrappy which has the same hardware as crafty, you can >>>>download the source or an executable yourself. You have hundreds of other >>>>options, but still you go on and on like a five year old child wanting >>>>candy about playing exactly the one crafty which is reserved for strong >>>>human opponents. >>>> >>>>What is your real motivation for this nonsence ? >>>> >>>>Andreas Stabel >>> >>>I think you may have me confused with someone who doesn't like or respect Bob. >>> >>>bruce >> >>The reason for my post above is the bickering about beeing alowed to play >>one of the many craftys available, when even the source is free and people >>can set crafty up in any configuration they want and play it. >> >>A lot of this bickering is pretty vicious in the tone and completely >>unwarranted for the reasons statet above and from the reasons Mr. Hyatt has >>given, causing my perhaps too harsh statement above. >> >>But I have not got you confused, because the following line from the post >>above: >>--- >>> >>--- >>>Just checked again and guess what? Idle: 44 >>--- >>> >>--- >>>bruce >>shows that you are also part of the bickering, so my statement stands. >> >>Best regards >>Andreas Stabel > >Bruce is not part of the bickering. > >Bruce only responded to hyatt. >Bruce talked about facts and did not complain. > >Uri I'm very sorry that I blamed the wrong person and I have written another post to this thread where I appologise, but I can do it here too, so once again I'm sorry Bruce. You were not person who deserved this blame. Best regards Andreas Stabel
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.