Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:03:17 05/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2004 at 09:01:37, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On May 19, 2004 at 08:48:54, Matthew Hull wrote: > >>On May 19, 2004 at 03:38:52, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On May 18, 2004 at 13:56:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On May 18, 2004 at 13:46:02, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>I hope that makes it clear why _I_ have not said much about playing this year. >>>>>>Who knows _what_ rule(s) the ICCA will use this time around. >>>>> >>>>>I know. And I have told you many times. >>>> >>>>That is _really_ convincing. You guys don't even want to produce a list of who >>>>is playing??? >>> >>>Check the WCCC page today. >>> >>>> >>>>Last time I looked _you_ didn't speak for the ICCA any more than the organizers >>>>of the WCCC I tried to enter a couple of years back spoke for it. >>> >>>I don't know when or where you looked, or what happened in Paris or Jakarta that >>>you frequently mention. What I know is about WCCC 2004, and I am telling you in >>>the clearest possible way what will be the case here. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>At the CCT we manage to have an _open_ discussion about the rules _before_ the >>>>event, and then we go by those rules. The ICCA might try that at some point in >>>>time, perhaps??? >>>> >>>>I'd love to play remotely. Once it becomes obvious that doing so is "OK". >>> >>>We don't provide operators here. But if you send someone to operate Crafty on >>>your behalf, that is OK. >> >> >>Since you have internet access at the event, just log Crafty's opponents onto >>ICC and play. That will save the enourmous cost of sending a human to play >>moves manually on a physical board. > >We would very much like to have Crafty here, but I don't think Crafty is more >important than Shredder, Junior, Fritz, Diep, Deep Sjeng, ParSOS, IsiChess, etc, >to deserve a special treatment. I've never asked for "special treatment". I have only asked for "the same treatment". I've already given in another response to you exactly how I was _not_ treated the same as a commercial entry (the commercials paid a higher entry fee so I presume that was the driving force to get them there no matter what). All I want is "clear and consistent" treatment. 3-4 years ago non-author operators were ok (I entered 4 such events if I recall since 1996). The next year with no announcement, they were not. After I gave up on attending, with absolutely no public announcement, the ICCA then decided to let a commercial program (I don't recall which one, Bruce will probably remember as I believe he attended) use a non-author operator. "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me." I'm trying to avoid getting fooled a second time... > >Bob repeats the "I don't know, you don't know" thing over and over. But I have >all along said clearly how the tournament will be held here, and just repeated >it. If he comes here, or sends someone on his behalf to operate Crafty, then >Crafty will participate. Otherwise it won't. See above. The ICCA can (and has) changed the rules a week before the event. I doubt you can prevent that. > > >>That is such a no-brainer. But alas, there are no brains running this event. > >Thank you for your compliments. If instead of attacking us so much you have >tried to organize next year's WCCC somewhere in the US, we might have all been >enlightened by your brains and wisdom...
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.