Author: Peter Berger
Date: 12:01:29 04/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 21, 2001 at 13:53:48, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 20, 2001 at 18:50:59, Peter Berger wrote: > >>On April 19, 2001 at 17:50:55, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>> >>>Not very hard to guess. They are so pissed off by Weiner that they do not want >>>to hear about him anymore. And he his happy with the situation so he won't >>>change a thing. >>> >>>Bad luck for Stefan, but if he licences his program to another company I guess >>>they will list it again? >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>What are your reasons to post a message like this and put additional oil into >>the fire ? >> >>I can imagine very positive ones ( like simply helping people you think do the >>right thing ) and negative ones ( like being afraid that actually this conflict >>is resolved or ignored and a new opponent enters the list where you compete ; > > > >:) :) > >I'm not afraid of a new competitor. The SSDF list would be better if all top >programs were listed, and Shredder is a top program. > > > > >> or >>: if all engines are availlable as Chessbase engines life becomes easier as SSDF >>can simply play a Fritz tournament ) . > > > >I don't understand exactly what you imply. But anyway as you know I have no >problem with ChessBase. > > I didn't imply anything here at all - by purpose I took two examples which I don't believe are true and which sound rather ridiculous . My statement was about the general idea of involvement of programmers , not about you specifically - irony doesn't translate usually as I have learned before . > > >>This is another reason why I think it is best if SSDF is neutral , tests the >>strongest programs , listen to programmers when they tell how to setup their >>programs and when there is some problem > > > >I agree with you. > >However if you threaten to drop an atomic bomb on one country, don't expect them >to keep their total neutrality and sense of humour. > >Not publishing the ranking of Shredder looks to me like the most neutral and >objective thing they could do given the stream of events. They have not been >negative toward the program, despite the attacks of its publishers. I would call >this great self-control. > Hmm , I definitely disagree here and think your comparison is far off - it isn't all "good guys"- "bad guys" btw ; I have followed the discussions . > > > > >> - and otherwise : simply ignore their >>comments , sorry . >> >>This way we have an independent list judging about the strength of the engines - >>it does have some limitations as it only answers which one is the strongest if >>matches are played like SSDF does - but there is nothing else afaik aside from >>the official championships . > > > >That's right. > > > > >>If many strong programs are missing the list loses much of its importance . > > > >Not many strong programs are missing. Apart from Shredder, who else is missing? > Not many - of the availlable very strong programs I miss Shredder and Yace currently - with Shredder added the SSDF list would be kind of perfect again . > > > > Christophe From experience I know completely disagreeing with someone seems to imply negative feelings about him/his personality here at this place usually - I hope you remember I don't have the slightest problems with you at all . pete
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.