Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 11:50:00 11/28/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 28, 2003 at 12:41:14, Mike Byrne wrote: >I think this was handled very very badly, perhaps correct under the rules of the >tournament, but still very badly overall. > >My suggestion to prevent this from happening in the future is to have strict >time lines BEFORE and AFTER the tournament for one to question the "legality" of >a program, but not during the tournament. Especially in light of these >artificial deadlines made to author while studying for his exams. (why the rush >to judgment? IMO, the organizers were very heavy handed in how this was >conducted - esp. with the ultimatums and the like) There would have been plenty >of time to address these issues after the tournament. If porgram was found to >be illegal after the tournament . all the games should be discarded, not just a >select few. > >Instead , we have a tournament that has been swallowed up by this controversy >and it will be forever tainted. > >Perhaps a bright and promising programmer that may have nothing to do with ICGA >or even computer chess again. Is this a correct result if he is innocent? > >Again just my $.02, your mileage may vary, opposing views welcome. I agree with everything you said, but would like to add that the programmer of List also didn't behave very clever. Exams etc are no excuse to not answer a simple email or give them a call. He didn't give the tournament responsibles an option once they made their last proposal. The decisions made (by both sides) can't be cancelled now. What still can be done though is to find out whether List is a clone or not. I think that's very important for the CC community. As a start, it would be good to hear the programmers POV in this case. Sargon
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.