Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 09:27:01 12/06/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 06, 2003 at 11:46:35, Chris Kantack wrote: >On December 06, 2003 at 05:35:18, bryan whitby wrote: > >>Thanks Chris >>Excellent review. >>Regards from England >>Bryan >> >>PS....As you obviously have links with Excalibur, how about an interview on your >>site with Ron Nelson. >>Ron programmed the very first Fidelity Chess Challenger and I think that he >>still works for Excalibur. He never gets a mention anywhere in computer chess >>history. >>Ask he about the time that two Fidelity chess computers met in a past World >>Microcomputer Chess Championships and one of the operator resigned in a winning >>position to let the other Fidelity machine (who had more points) get the full >>point !! > >Yes. Ron Nelson not only still works for Excalibur but he is the designer and >programmer for all of Excalibur's chess computer products. I correspond with >him frequently, Ron is still actively planning and designing additional new and >revised products for the coming years. > >I am happy to say that Ron Nelson has been mentioned recently in "chess >history". In the October 2003 issue of "Chess Life" (page 7) in episode 10 of >"chess history" there is quote from Sid Samole: > >"Commander Spock was playing chess against the computer. There it was, the >answer to my quest for the perfect chess opponent. I could not get it out of my >mind. The next morning I mentioned it to my secretary, Marilyn. She replied >that her boyfriend, Ron Nelson, an engineer at Zenith Radio, was a computer >hobbyist and electronic engineer who might be able to build such a device." > >Regards, > >Chris Kantack >http://home.earthlink.net/~kantack/lcdchess/home.htm Please clarify what your relationship is with Excalibur. Specifically, are you compensated in any way shape or form either through direct or indirect payments from Excalibur or through free or discunted products from Excalibur. I only say this becasue your posts and webpage have never indicated that there is a realationshop there and they are written as if you are a totally uncompensated independent reviewer (and at this point, I hope you are). If you are compensated, the reader of your reviews should be informed and of the manner in which you are compensated. Then the reader can appropriately consider your reviews knowing that your are compensated If you are not compesated , you should state that your are not.
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.