Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: This is very much about you...

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 11:50:45 09/04/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 04, 2002 at 14:43:54, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

>On September 04, 2002 at 12:03:38, Roger D Davis wrote:
>
>the accusation is backed up with loads of evidence and
>a proof the chance it was a 'mistake' is less then
>0.0000000000000000000000000000000001
>
>First the human aspect was dealt with and that was a talk with
>Bob. I have posted it already 4 times here what happened.
>
>So it is very relevant to accuse bob publicly, after he doing
>such stupid statemetns everywhere on deep blue. it shows the
>big picture. 9 out of 10 of his statements are based without
>knowing that statistics proof something in science.
>
>Bob clearly doesn't know about it, as all his publications show.
>
>I focus upon this publication because this is the publication that
>concerns me. I lack the time to analyze the other publications for you
>but you will not like the outcome...

Go for it.  But read the thesis first so that you know what you are looking
at...  Hint :averages...

Of course, you haven't made any significant points about the DTS paper either,
other than to help me remember a bit about producing the tables.  Didn't change
one conclusion in the paper, nor the performance numbers that the paper
presented...

>
>>Actually, we are talking about you, Vincent. WE ARE TALKING VERY MUCH ABOUT YOU.
>>You have chosen to accuse someone of fraud in a public forum. This is far
>>different in nature that simply saying that a mistake was make, or even saying
>>that you don't respect someone's intelligence, or even saying that someone is
>>stupid, because this goes to INTENTIONALITY and to character. Such accusations
>>are not to be made lightly, particularly where the charge involved is scientific
>>dishonesty.
>>
>>If you're going to make such severe charges, particularly in a public forum,
>>then you have to accept the fact that others are going to inspect your motives
>>in doing so. They are going to look at what interests you might be furthering by
>>making such charges, they're going to look at your own level of maturity, and
>>they're going to look at the history of the interaction between you and the
>>person you've accused.
>>
>>That's just life. Science doesn't exist in a vacuum...science is just a part of
>>life.
>>
>>So the spotlight is on you, too. We have a saying: If you can stand the heat,
>>get out of the kitchen.
>>
>>Roger
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>We are not talking about me here but about Hyatt. How important is it
>>>that a professor of good standing is writing down the truth in an
>>>official article he writes?
>>>
>>>I mean if you, just released from prison or madhouse,
>>>to just give an example, write down some faked results and submit it
>>>to ICCA and they post it, then i can understand if it is not getting
>>>taken serious.
>>>
>>>Now how important is it that a government official with a professor
>>>in front of his name is writing down the truth?
>>>



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.