Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:23:32 08/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2001 at 05:37:17, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >> >>1. Amateur: >> You cannot be an amateur if you earn money by the selling of your program, >> (that would be a commercial interest), so the amateurs cannot be receiving >> money from the game-company... > >How about programmers who had once (say 2 years ago) obtained an amount of money >for publishing their program (i guess young talents fall into this). Do they >have to be non-Amateurs for the rest of their lives ? > >I'm sorry, but I think it's not possible to make a clear and fair >classification. IMHO, one should omit this nonsense completely. > >Regards, Uli > >>2. Semi-professional: >> Are you an associate of a games-programming company if you let them >> sell your program and receive some money for it? >> Unclear. >> Have the named programs become "commercial products" by advertising >> and selling them in the same way as the game-company's flagship-products? >> Yes, I think so! >> So the named programs cannot be semi-professionals. >>3. Professional: >> Apparently the question if the programmers are heavily income-dependent >> on their game progams is NOT relevant to the organisers. Strange... >> >>I feel the definitions need mending. My internet connection is about >>to break due to idle(eh?) time, so I cannot give my proposed exact >>definitions yet. Maybe later. >> >>Theo van der Storm I view this just like the USCF views titles. Once you are a master, you are a master, even if your rating drops to 1500. Once you are a professional, you are a professional for life, period. Changing back and forth just because you couldn't sell a program for two years is nonsensical. Once you are a pro baseball player, you are a pro for life. You can _never_ get your amateur status back in that sport.
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.