Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 16:34:59 11/27/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 27, 2003 at 18:39:36, margolies,marc wrote: >To whom are you posing this question? >On this server- this very server-- we had reasonable persons discuss this issue >in January. We vindicated LIST here. Why does David Levy have less right to ask >questions that we openly debate than we do? In principle-- participants agree to >be bound by the rules of any tourament he enters or organization he joins, at >the risk of expulsion. Not necessarily. What if one of the rules is absurd? I don't believe that the participants could be held to following that rule. In Alabama, USA, they have "Blue Laws." People have been persecuted because they violated those laws. Hence, injustices do happen, even within a reasonably good legal system. On the other hand, it has happened more than once that an innocent prisoner is forced to sign papers agreeing not to sue the State if released. That is called "signing under duress." The idea that Levy or any one else can force people to reveal proprietary information is not reasonable, so the participants should be able to ignore the absurd rule knowing that it would never stand up in a real Court. I suspect that all the participants ignored the rule, assuming that the tournament organizers would never be stupid enough to try to enforce it. IMHO. Bob D. >Your simple is question is too clever. It is not simple either becuase it >suggests the rules cannot be enforced because of procedural issues you cannot >cite. That is the worst kind of Sophistry. >>Simple question - >> >>Without already having seen List's source code - how was this accusation made >>??? >> >> >>Mridul
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.