Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 21:47:44 11/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 23, 2000 at 15:31:19, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>I perceive a note of anger in your post that is missplaced. Maybe understable,
>but missplaced. I am not and I was not shooting at you, but just wondering about
>how testing is done. Never I have tried to damage your program, in case you
>thought it was so. It is just that I was surprised to find out that lack of
>basic knowledege. No matter if something happens 0,001% of the time,
>conceptually speaking IS esential.
Can you please mention something that is not essential in your sense of the
word?
I happen to have a very different point of view about this issue, it seems.
> Of course you have your reasons and you have
>given them to me and that's fine; that is precisely what I wanted to get since
>the first post: to know why. Firt I got the "whys" of testers, now yours. And
>certainly it is not me who decide if B+N is important. No ferdinan. It is an
>issue that has been always considered important in any fair ending book. In the
>classic book "Chess Endings, Esential knowledege", by Averbach, B+N kind of
>endings gets pages from 11 to 14. So it does other kinds of endings.So it does
>in any kind of bchess book. Then clearly is not my decision, but a common sense
>decision since ever, and fully documented.
So what?
The problem is not to know if it is documented or not, the problem is to know if
it is important or not.
You are surprised by the fact it is not important. I confirm: it is not
important at all.
>Respect your priorities, you are, of course, the best judge to sort them out
>according your goals, but respect your conception of esentials I cannot agree:
>if everything is esential, as you say, then nothing is. Just simple cartesian
>logic. Finally, Christophe, nobody is laughing. At least in my case you could
>just see in me a face of wonder, but not even a smile.
>In any post you answer about Tiger, you say that comments are welcome. I hope
>mine are, also, welcome.
Your initial post was a critic against the beta testers.
Unfair critisism I would say.
Christophe
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.