Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:14:45 03/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 2005 at 14:05:18, Thomas Gaksch wrote: >On March 17, 2005 at 13:13:23, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On March 17, 2005 at 03:22:06, Gabor Szots wrote: >> >>>Do you agree that after giving you due credit Toga's "author" can claim that >>>"his" engine is his own intellectual product and can be called a new engine? >> >>Let me say it plainly: >> >>Toga II is fruit. >> >>There are a few tiny tweaks. >> >>If there was ever a model for the definition of a clone, it should say: >>"See Toga II" > >you are absolutely right. i have never said anything else. i am very frustrated >that everybody is criticising me. i made a big mistake. thats true. but i can´t >turn back the time. i only could apologize me for my exorbitancy (i hope it is >the right word). > >what is bad on it, that the little changes seems to improve the playing >strength. why shouldn´t it be tested. are not all open sources projects clones? >i dont know. > >thomas >a frustrated "co-author" or user of open source software You made some very important and interesting changes to an existing chess engine. The criticism you received is well deserved, because you misrepresented to truth to get some free testing. On the other hand, you did come clean and tell the truth when put on the spot, and so I think you deserve credit for that. This is all behind us now. I think that fact that you were honest about it in the end and your apology is enough. How about turning it into something very positive. Why not talk about your ideas for the changes and tell us why you decided to try them?
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.