Author: Jim Bodkins
Date: 09:59:01 11/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 2003 at 12:53:22, Jim Bodkins wrote: >On November 29, 2003 at 09:32:07, Andrew Williams wrote: > >>On November 29, 2003 at 08:17:31, Palmer wrote: >> >>>I just remembered that some time ago there was a discussion here on CCC if >>>ruffian is a crafty clone or not. >>>Here some comments form robert hyatt to that topic: >>> >>>...I agree. The real test is in tactics. It is not easy to make a copy of >>>Crafty either better or worse at tactics, but particularly making it better is >>>non-trivial. It's far easier to twiddle with a few eval terms to make it >>>play significantly different... >>> >>>...In the case of Ruffian, I'm not sure it is anything at all, other than >>>a very unlikely happening. >>>Ruffian could be any of the following, in decreasing order of probability: >>>1. A copy of a freeware engine with some changes or additions. >>>2. A copy of a commercial engine, aided by a hex editor to change strings >>>to disguise what has happened. >>>3. A copy of a commercial engine, modified, after someone found access to >>>the un-released source code somehow. >>>4. A program written by a current commercial (or amateur) author and released >>>anonymously, for reasons I wouldn't try to guess. >>>5. A completely new program, developed by a completely new author, sight- >>>unseen by anybody until very recently. >>>It _could_ be any of those. I don't have an opinion yet, except that the >>>above list is written in decreasing probability order.... >> >> >> >>I think that if you're not prepared to give your full, real name (as the rules >>of CCC require), you don't get to make stupid and venal accusations about >>people. I believe that you posted your message purely to troll. I believe that >>you owe Per-Ola Valfridsson an apology. I believe that you are too cowardly and >>too weak to apologize as you should. >> >>Andrew Williams > > >I understood his post. If there is a problem (which I didnt see), let the admins >handle it. You said "I believe that you are too cowardly and too weak to >apologize as you should.". The question is, are you? My intention isnt to cause trouble, but your response seem extreme. It is interesting to see this happen a second time and clearly indicates a need for an alternate or new solution to this issue.
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.