Author: Peter Berger
Date: 21:30:01 04/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
You wrote a long well-worded article . I have no idea if the SSDF people are nice or bad guys : judging from most of their posts here or elsewhere they sound rather level-headed . Nevertheless your article is just what you accuse Mr Weiner of : DISINFORMATION ! Reading it carefully shows you didn't really answer to mine at all , or did I miss something ? It boils down to a simple question : why don't they simply take Shredder 5 or Deep Shredder NOW , test it and post the results on their list now ? I guess there's simply _no_ obvious answer to this question . I can only speculate that this has to do with some old battles I don't know and can't comment on . So I repost my list ( little mistake eliminated and new point added ) : a.) SSDF was forbidden to test Shredder 4 b.) SSDF complained . c.) SSDF was allowed to test Shredder 5 d.) SSDF rejected and said they only wanted to test Shredder if they could test any other program by Millenium , too . e.) Millenium agreed to this but pointed out they can only make this statement for programs where they still hold the rights . f.) SSDF rejected to test Shredder 5 again and brought up the issue of an unpayed invoice of 500 DM of some years ago ( which never was mentioned before ) . g.) Millenium offered to provide free copies for the testers to make up for the unclear invoice issue . Btw , it seems to me some of these guys really have a _good_ memory :-) : http://f23.parsimony.net/forum50826/messages/17187.htm Speaking lowly of Shredder because of its missing in the SSDF list makes no sense to me ; your post would make more sense if it _was_ tested and was ranked 25 . pete
This page took 0.01 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.