Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 11:48:16 05/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2004 at 13:20:35, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On May 19, 2004 at 12:19:05, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>On May 19, 2004 at 11:56:37, Robert Hyatt 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. >>> >>> >>>I'll run through this once more. Slowly. >>> >>>In Jakarta, there was _no_ outside communication. No game results. No nothing. >>> Dead silence. >>> >>>In Paris, same deal. No internet access. No nothing. I believe this was the >>>event where Thorsten was getting results out at his own expense via cell. >>> >>>Two of the first two WMCCC's I ever participated in. While at every ACM and >>>WCCC event past 1980 we had outside world access. >>> >>>Then For one of the more recent events, and no, now I don't even remember which >>>because I no longer care, I made arrangements to get a pretty good box (8-way >>>from Dell) and when they finally worked out the details for me, I tried to enter >>>and was told "We have a new rule that says that a programmer _must_ attend." >>>Bruce Moreland went to this event and can confirm all of this as he and I talked >>>about it multiple times. I then "undid" my machine arrangements, a bit >>>embarassing after having asked and having had some folks at Dell go out of the >>>way to help. Later Bruce tells me that a commercial entry could not get the >>>programmer there and the ICCA decided to drop the rule. >>> >>>Doesn't that do wonders for my wanting to participate _again_?? Doesn't that >>>make me take what you say on behalf of the ICCA at something less than true face >>>value, since the rules get changed on a whim??? >>> >>>That is my problem. Later they _again_ modified this rule so that it became >>>possible to have a non-programmer operator, but at double the normal entry fee. >>>What is _that_ about? This is an organization that wants to promote computer >>>chess or throttle it? Is it all about the money going in to the ICCA? Or is >>>it about the computer chess competition and interest in same? >>> >>>Looks _bad_ from my perspective. And when the last CCT had what appears to be >>>over 5x the entries of the current WCCC event, and there is no cost, and there >>>are no changing entry rules, and so forth, what is the incentive to go to a WCCC >>>rather than the next CCT event? >>> >>>Hopefully you get my drift. >>> >>>I don't believe _any_ of this has put the ICCA in a particularly favorable >>>light. I guess those of us that originally formed this organization can just >>>carry on feeling embarassed about how the tournaments have been handled the past >>>few years. The journal is a good thing. But the tournament (which was >>>originally the 'flagship' of the ICCA) has gone steadily downhill. >>> >>>How would _you_ react to such utter nonsense??? >>> >> >>It seems that indeed some points where unclear in some of the previous WCCCs. >>But again, I am only responsible for the current WCCC. And I am doing my best to >>clarify the things as much as possible. > >Yes you are. But as I mentioned _YOU_ are not the ICGA. Through at least 1992 >or so, "we programmers" had a strong voice in what happened. Somewhere around >1992-1995 things started to change however. > As long as it was about providing information, I replied to everything you asked. If it is about flamewars, I'm too busy to take part, sorry. > >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>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. >>> >>>I have a volunteer that would do well. I'll investigate hardware one more time. >>> But I can guarantee you that if the rules change this time, it will be my >>>absolute last time to try this... >> >>If you send an operator here, there will be no problem.
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.