Author: Peter Skinner
Date: 21:13:35 11/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
>There's a major difference in my mind. I choose to differ between those who >participate actively and those who just uses software. The former deserves much >more respect and appreciation as they engage themselves personally. The latter >is the easy way IMO and except for programmers there's very little at stake >except the ego of the operator. I am hardly just an operator. I am a serious beta tester. I do care what happens in the games. > >My heart doesn't bleed for grumpy operators, who can't stand to lose a few games >once and a while on a free server and looks for excuses. If it had been a >!computer account at ICC there would have been a legitimate reason for >complaint. This time it was ego. I am not a grumpy operator. I do not care whether is wins or losses. Really I don't. I just hate, and I mean hate means cheated against. If you don't mind, let's play poker, I will take all the aces, and you play with all the 3's. Let's see if you care that I am cheating. >The owner isn't playing against anyone, he or she only facilitates computer >access. Quite a few computer accounts use different programs from time to time, >which also results in different strength and characteristics. I play everyone. And why shouldn't I? Why should I exclude my accounts to either computer or humans? Who are you to say whether I can do this? Is there a set of rules somewhere I failed to read? >>And if human players can exclude computer players from their formula, computer >>players should be able to do likewise. > >That's the issue. If the account in question didn't want to play computers then >it's a different ballgame, however I seriously doubt that is the case. If an >account plays against both, then it doesn't matter if there's a (c) attached or >not. Yes it does. You just don't think so. >>It doesn't matter if the computer account has feelings or not, it belongs to >>somebody, and that somebody has certain rights and deserved to be treated with >>an obvious level of respect. I agree totally. >Noone said anything about account feelings. If he feels that his rights were >violated then there's a proper way of handling the problem. I went through the proper way. I only asked here for input, as MOST of the people here use common sense when evaluating these type problems. I was asking for advice. I can see yours isn't worth shit. >>My car has no feelings, but if someone beats the hell out of it with a stick, >>they are going to get a big load from me, and the cops are coming. >Exactly. The correct approach is to call the cops (aka. admins). Hanging someone >out to dry in a random forum isn't the right way. No matter what kind of forum >it is or the quality of the evidence. > >Btw, do you check comp-comp games for illegal human intervention? As a matter of fact, yes I do. If I feel an opening is an anti-computer opening from a computer, it is unlikely that the opponent is computer. There was one instance, where the opening was very closed, then for some odd reason the opponent opened it up. Computers do not normally close positions, then open them just for something to do. I believe this was also the case in a CCT-2 match with Diep vs Junior. Human involvement was suspected. I am not trying to hang the person out to dry. I forgot to take out one area of his name.
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.