Author: Michael Cummings
Date: 21:40:23 12/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 04, 2000 at 03:34:11, Andrew Williams wrote: >On December 03, 2000 at 18:54:47, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: > >>On December 03, 2000 at 03:37:40, Gregor Overney wrote: >> >>>I can read commercials about buying computers at CCC, political discussions >>>about a countries elections, and tons of people publishing their results about >>>engine vs. engine on a single CPU. Well, those "limited" engine vs. engine posts >>>might just be acceptable, but the others are definitely not suitable for this >>>group. >>> >>>Either we get rid of moderators or they start doing their job. CCC is not >>>getting faster by adding messages that are absolutely not related to CCC. >>> >>>BTW, why do I not like engine vs. engine wars running on the same CPU? Some >>>chess programs rely on extremely fast searches. Other rely more on clever >>>evaluation functions and search much less nodes. For the first type of engines, >>>frequent cache flashes are a much harder penalty than for those engines that do >>>not search a la brute force. So, if you have the need to test your engine, but >>>you have only one CPU available, try some free chess server to compete with >>>others. Otherwise, give those engines a change to "maxout" their performance on >>>a "undisturbed" CPU. A dual CPU system is more or less acceptable. - And use two >>>identical systems since a comparison of Crafty running on PII/300 compared to a >>>run on PowerPC 400 MHz does not provide too much useful input. If you just want >>>to find out how your system compares, check out SpecINT2000 since it contains >>>Crafty as one of its test programs (see >>>http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/CINT2000/186.crafty/docs/186.crafty.html). >>> >>>Gregor >> >>I can understand your criticism to a point. However, you should bear in mind >>that there are many emails and complaints that the moderators have to sift >>through and act accordingly. As a matter of fact most of the moderation is >>simply not transparent -- you get to see only the "crude" aspects of it: >>message deletion and the occasional warning, etc. If we started hair-splitting >>about the contents of the messages and their compliance with the Charter you can >>be sure that this forum would cease to exist. Just like in everyday >>communication, redundancy must exist for the real exchange of ideas to take >>place. >> >>On average, I think that we've been doing a pretty good job, as it is extremely >>difficult to satisfy all of the CCC readers... >> > >I agree with the first part of this sentence; the second part is, to say the >least, putting it mildly. > >Andrew I feel pretty soon that it will be a free for all attack on the moderators, we have not had one for a while, and I am certain that a few people are itching to attack the way in which the moderators have handled some issues of late. All it would take to start the fire is for someone to be suspended over these political posts and you watch the fires Burn :) Or it might just all go away quietly.
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.