Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:02:08 09/06/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 06, 1998 at 12:33:41, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Dear Bob and all: >If the sheer number of posts that a post produce is a signal of something, it >is, then a signal NOT to be pointless as you, Bob, said it is. Let me tell you >that I feel a feeling of harshness in your post about my comments, as if I was >trying to in a way or another to misstreat Crafty. Not at all, and if it sounded like that, I apologize for the sound. I was simply trying to be positive in the statement that Crafty has been free, is currently free, and will continue to be free... and I did not take any offense at what you said. As I mentioned in another post, the question *I* would like to have seen is "which of the following programs have you played?" followed by a complete list of commercial and freeware programs. Or "which of the following programs do you have on your machine?" followed by the same list. But sorry if it sounded bitter or something... it certainly wasn't intended. I was *not* "frowning" when I wrote it. :) >So both judgements, one open, the other implicit, are wrong. >You know very well, because I have post about it and email to you about it once >or twice, that I have ever desired to own a Crafty in CD Rom and that I even >have thought that you should got a legitimate earning for that. Of course I >respect and admire your decision not to do so, but at the same time I ask from >you not to think or feel that in any way I am trying to put Crafty in a bad >light because only 14% of people here did not show interest in an eventual >purchase. >Also are wrong those that believe than me or anybody else is doing some >presupositions about the luck Crafty could have in the market or even his >quality. I know very well this is an special site and I did not pretend to >deduce anything beyond that. In fact, my post is full of questions, not of >answers. >Wrong are, also, those that make stadistical analysis about these questions as >if they pretend to prove something. If I don't understand badly the spirit of >the poll, is more a matter of fun and curiosity that a kind of scientific tool. >It would be just fair that people treat this effort, made by Steven and by the >guys that ocassionaly post question to be make, with more simpathy and >forgiveness. >In this particular case, I wanto to put clear that I was the father of that >question. I did it because to know what other people here would do IF Crafty >became commercial has been one of the things I have been curious all the time. >Flawed, stupid, pointless? I don not know how just a question made in an >informal poll can be judged in that way; you can say it is not intertesting to >you, but the statistical issue is out of place. In fact, many of the following >post has showed is was not pointless or uninteresting. At least it is now cleasr >that at 25 dollars any guy who pursue the idea to produce a CD with Crafty will >meet interested purcharsers. >In any case, if by reasons I don't understand at the moment Bob feell I have >made some damage to him or his wonderful program, I ask him to forgive me. I was >just trying to be helpfull for the existence of the poll and I believe those >that puted it there thought that nothing wrong was in it.Is my hope they were >not wrong >Fernando As I said, no offense taken. However, the way the questions are worded does make them provide less information than they could... IE we know that 60% of the responders have played Crafty. How many have played other programs? We know that a small percentage would buy crafty. How many have bought *any* program? etc... Bob
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.