Author: Stefan Meyer-Kahlen
Date: 12:57:27 12/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 03, 2000 at 15:34:43, Marcus Kaestner wrote: >>Yes, of course you are skipping the point which do not comfort you, like the > >that´s your behaviour, not my. Where exactly did I do so? >>main issue of this whole thing: You have spread lies about Shredder and the >>court forbid you to do so. > >the only thing the court said is that i´m not allowed to publish a word about a >shredder 5 beta. not more not less. Yes, exactly, because you don't have this version! That's all we wanted to achive. >>Also I think it is still very interesting for everybody to hear your arguments >>you used at the court. Do you allow me to quote them here? Do you want to quote >>them here yourself? No, you certainly won't do that as this would not fit to >>your poor little Marcus strategy. > >i do not know what you mean, but do what you want. Where? >>I can't remember using the word final but there certainly was a decision made: > >hahahahaha, you must have a very short brain. go through your posts. you can >find the word "final decision" several times. as usual you feel not able to >remember things which are not fitting very well in your bag. Did I really? >>You are not allowed to publish tests or results of Shredder versions you do not >>have. > >again and again you are telling wrong things. i am only forbidden to say >something about a s5 beta although i have several versions which you by yourself >called beta-version. of course at the court you say all of these version were >not beta-versions. but be patient, in the legal case i´m able to proof it. I said that the version you had is signifcantly different to the one in London and in Shredder5. >>>to 5.0. the main change is only in the triple brain, which now do not only >>>compare the evals. however, that whole triple thing is a piece of trash. >> >> >>I didn't expect neutral reports or tests concerning Shredder from you any more. >>So your last sentence fits to my image. > >your image is as wrong as your whole mind. My mind is wrong? > instead of you i rely on things like >honesty and character. so i´ve told you several times before that i will review >your program objective - the good and the bad things. but you think i´m out of >the same stuff as you. in this case, of course, my view would change and because >you are out of this stuff you fear that anyone else has the same character. What are those assumption based on? And why are you just insulting me instead of giving some facts to support you claim? >and btw: if the triple brain would be good, i would say it. but you by yourself >know very well that the results are very bad. ok, it´s a new thing, but it´s a >piece of trash if you compare the results. > >example? > > Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws > > 1 Gambit Tiger 2671 59 58 100 62.0 % 2586 32.0 % > 2 Shredder 5 2659 61 63 100 60.0 % 2588 24.0 % > 3 Tiger 13 2641 64 53 100 57.0 % 2592 34.0 % > 4 Century 3 2568 61 65 100 44.5 % 2606 21.0 % > 5 SOS 2532 66 60 100 38.5 % 2614 23.0 % > 6 Triple Brain S5/SOS 2529 65 59 100 38.0 % 2614 24.0 % > >based on 300 auto232 blitz-games on celeron 540. >you see the triple-brain is worse than sos and 142 points under s5. so were is >the advantage? > >>>it seems that you have understood nothing. after last week i have to pay nothing >>>till now. the judgment is far away from beeing official, unreversable. >> >> >>Come on Marcus. If you keep protesting to the judgement of the court the final >>decision can indeed take quite a while. But the costs will get bigger and >bigger > >so what? do you be afraid that you keep sitting on all at the end. No. >than it´s expensive, indeed! >>>i´m very relaxed. >>>you even can call it personal war which was started by your side. >> >> >>OK poor little Marcus. > >i see you want to provoke me again and again with your "poor" mesh. >it seems that this is all what you have to say. No, that's not all, but I think it's a pretty good description of your strategy. I am still missing some answers of you: * Why don't you give us all your arguments you used at the court? * Why don't you answer the critical question which version of Shredder you have tested? >so we can stop the discussion. See above, there is still something missing. >paltry character. Your argumentation is pretty simple. Just accusing me of turning the facts without evidence and insulting me. Stefan To the moderations: I rather don't have this deleted even though he keeps insulting me.
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.