Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 13:09:57 04/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 21, 2001 at 15:01:29, Peter Berger wrote:
>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 .
But we do not completely disagree anyway.
We only disagree on a very few points.
I guess we have more points of agreement than the other way around.
Christophe
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.