Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 11:56:23 03/24/98
Go up one level in this thread
(This may get posted twice, I got disconnected the first tiem) On March 23, 1998 at 22:53:07, Scott Carmichael wrote: > Nice cry Elvis, but the fact is plain and simple: If the SSDF goes >down, it will only be a matter of time before the next version pops up. >The problem at SSDF is not the volunteers who test the programs, it is >the people who decide which version of what software, with these extra >features, and that extra memory that have caused the problems at SSDF. >What makess you so sure that none of those volunteers would once again >come forward. > People who do this for the enjoyment, and even for the love os this >mixture of science and sport will be doing this , I can guarantee you. Last place I worked we used to have various chess events. The guy running the events made some decisions that seemed controversial at the time (he tried to charge $10 for an event) and he took some flak in an email mailing list. The guy eventually said, forget it, I don't need this kind of thing, someone else is welcome to step forward, but I quit. Nobody stepped forward, and that was the end of chess events for us. If someone wants to make an independent testing organization, they don't have to kill the SSDF list first, there is room for more than one organization. I doubt the Swedish list people will care, after all, a point of doing science is that results should be repeatable given the same experiment and a different set of experimenters. Since you are talking about how there being a lot of volunteers out there, perhaps you could demonstrate this by being the first one. bruce
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.