Author: Johan Hutting
Date: 13:46:50 10/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2003 at 09:38:27, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >As you were the one to extract some "deeper" meaning from a simple engine vs. >engine test that I performed with the only version of Diep I had, I will indulge >myself in extracting the presupposition found in your retort: just like some >other people (very few of them, actually) you are saying in a roundabout way >that Ruffian is a clone, right? As they say: 'Assuming makes an ass out of you and me'. >Not very nice before the start of the CSVN tourney, to say the least. > >As for me, now I know where things stand: neither you or Vincent can accept the >existence and creation of a good chess program such as Ruffian in this case. So >you people had to put in a complaint to the CSVN to check and ensure that >Ruffian was not a clone. What is worse though is that you still go on with the >same insidious remarks. Regulations allow this wether you like it or not. The same can happen to Diep, XiniX or any of the other participants. In the past several clones have been identified this way (bionic, deep<9> and Djenghis come to mind) so why not? Of course, such accusations are never a positive thing, but if the work is original there should be no problem proving it. So what's this with you and 'Voyager' that vincent mentions in http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?321224 ? The only reference I could find is http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/1999/debian-devel-199905/msg00127.html quote: "These persons are downloading the source *** maybe *** changing two or three lines, recompiling the source, giving it a different name like "voyager" or "bionic impakt", and then entering the resulting executable in chess competitions." A search on "voyager Vidanovic" the CCC search engine only turned up one result containing: "My opinion was not right. But I am not a programmer and I have not see it. Look, we spent hours of time for test Voyager and I am very disappointed about Gabriele Müller (also Prof. Djordje Vidanovic and other persons)." What's so bad about verifying wether a new program is a clone or not? I hope your opinion and actions on this matter have nothing to do with this 'voyager' program. Since this is Ruffian's first real-life tournament it doesn't seem odd that some people still have doubts and would like to be convinced before playing it in the tournament. > >OTOH, for your information, the starting 1.Nh3 DOES exist in Diep's book OTOH, FYI it doesn't in mine. No ?, ! or even the move itself. "OTOH," just a reminder, you stated that it exists in all Diep 2.x in at least two forums. This seems odd, very odd. >that I >got together with the program itself. I did not tinker with the book. I suppose no one could have tinkered with it prior to sending it to you. Perhaps Santa Claus is involved. > All the >pgns and the book and the testing conditions were properly described. No >malevolence there. > >Thanks, anyway, for revealing the sources of mistrust and malevolence. Sorry >for that, I think that we should all be content when a good and strong new >program appears. I agree, after verifying the program is original should there be any doubt thereof. > >My suggestion: why don't we just try to enjoy our hobby and bury our petty >hatchets. I haven't seen any public complaints from both Vincent and Tony regarding "a clone named ruffian" participating in the dutch championship. OTOH, you did drag this 'vendetta' with Diepeveen into CCC and at least one other forum. Why not follow their example and keep it where it belongs, in email f.i.
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.