Author: Paul Petersson
Date: 05:29:10 04/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 18, 2001 at 13:43:46, Peter Berger wrote: >On April 18, 2001 at 09:01:59, Paul Petersson wrote: > >>On April 18, 2001 at 00:30:01, Peter Berger wrote: >> >>>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 ? >> >>It's already on the list. All the testers know the rating of S5. The fact that >>it's not on the official list is all because of one man and his actions and >>behaviour towards the SSDF. >> > >OK . That's partly good news ; so if the problems could be resolved you could >add it without much effort . Yes, but since they won't it doesn't matter. >>> >>>d.) SSDF rejected and said they only wanted to test Shredder if they could test >>>any other program by Millenium , too . >> >>Ossi Weiner knew the exact conditions long before we started to play with S5. He >>didn't agree and now it's to late. > >How can it be too late ? Shredder 5 too old now ? Well , you recently entered >Hiarcs 7.01 on a K6/450 which isn't exactly new either . No S5 isn't to old, but since Weiner didn't agree, S5/DeepShredder won't be on the official list. >And now there is Deep Shredder which is brand new . > >Afaik yout kept Shredder's results completely secret , so it can't be the reason >for Millenium's recent decisions . I think you're wrong. Weiner probably understands that S5 wouldn't top the list and therefor prefers to keep S5 out of it. >>>g.) Millenium offered to provide free copies for the testers to make up for the >>>unclear invoice issue . >>> >> >>There is NOTHING unclear about the invoice. His condition for paying it was that >>he wanted the SSDF to withdraw all games played with the Fritz5 autoplayer and >>only count manually played games. >> >>Paul > >Sorry : my choice of the word "unclear" was unfortunate . Thanks for adding the >facts here as you see them . My choice of "unclear" simply referred to some >counter claims Mr Weiner made ( they didn't sound too convincing anyway ). The counter claims are pure fiction!!! It's a typical example of his disinformation strategy. > >OK , so now the list should look like this ( I do know there are still some >minor things left out but as you didn't object to the rest no need to mention >this webpage discussion ; anyway this as some other little things were resolved >anyway afaik ): > >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 >invoice issue . Basically only a.) is correct. This list is misleading because it sees things from Weiners perspective and it assumes that his story is correct, which it isn't. > >In fact the things left out include that Millenium already allowed testing of >Shredder 4 after some discussions btw so it's not all one-sided. Yes it's all one-sided. Weiner never agreed to our terms. > >I think it is great that the SSDF is an independent organization . Good to hear! > >So members shouldn't be too close friends with certain programmers or their >companies . > >On the other hand this suggests SSDF shouldn't fight wars with other programmers We never did! >nor their companies either if it can be avoided IMHO . We never did. Weiner fights us like he fights many others. I'm sure you know about his other fights. > >I am not aware that SSDF ever had disagreements with Stefan Meyer-Kahlen . True. We never had. It's unfortunate that Stefan has suffered from Weiners actions. > >So it's kind of a war SSDF - Ossi Weiner . No, it's Weiner against anyone he picks. > >At christmas time this conflict was very near to be resolved - at least this was >my impression when reading some messages - the place to discuss this subject ( >the CSS forum ) was kind of unfortunate as several people jumped in with >messages full of hatred which didn't exactly help - but it seemed both parties >tried . > >The last thing that SSDF demanded was a public excuse by Mr Weiner - but as the >SSDF members really didn't post and act like angels either I don't think this >can be too serious a problem . You forget who started the attack! All those lies etc.... > >In fact I was surprised when Millenium cleared their nasty SSDF article from >their pages ;-) . It didn't make much difference. The damage was already done. > >This invoice discussion - come on !! If it's about the money - post a message >here and ask for donations ; I think in 3 days you'll have the money donated by >fans of your list and/or Shredder ! It's not only the money. It's just part of the picture. We can never trust Weiner again. > >Who is this list for anyway ? The companies ? I don't think so . > >So it's probably us costumers ! Of course it's for the costumers! > >Nobody demands that you all become big friends with Mr Weiner ... Yes that's fortunate because it would never happen! Paul > >Greetings . > >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.