Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Why Courthouses at all if we can "prove" it all at once?

Author: Rolf Tueschen

Date: 02:15:51 05/30/05

Go up one level in this thread

The reason why courts and justice and judges and juries exist at all is the
important fact that we cant accept plausibility proofs. If something is looking
like something (forbidden) it's still not sure that it's forbidden. To analyse
that we have courts and judges and experts.

You are NOT tournament director, you are NOT judge. You are one of many experts.
You have opinions but you don't have proofs! A. Schmidt doesn't have proofs
either. So, you two can't decide a case. A tournament director could decide,
although it might be the wrong decision.

It's funny when people "prove" something outside courthouses in an "as if"
procedure. Ok, the worst what could happen is that someone else is branded for
life - for the wrong reasons. Bad luck then for the branded kid... In other
words, you personally have nothing to lose if you make a false decision. A few
smileys will do the job.

This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.