Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 09:54:04 01/16/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2006 at 05:49:46, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On January 16, 2006 at 04:05:35, Fabien Letouzey wrote: > >>On January 14, 2006 at 17:50:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>If you think "mobility" is what makes fruit, you are _sadly_ mistaken. >> >>Hi Bob, >> >>I'd love to hear your opinion on this one! >> >>Fabien. > > >Let me write in openess how this looks. Excuse me it just seems so trivial. If I >were Bob I wouldnt answer people without profile or known names at all. But Bob >is known for his friendliness. He answers everyone. I wouldn't play around with >it. Why dont you come into openess and write what YOU are thinking? Why asking >Bob about his opinion? If everybody would have the same frankness and ethical >standards like Bob we all had a better talking climate, believe me. > >Please dont take this as a personal attack. If I had seen you this way I wouldnt >have addressed the problem to you. I did it because I have the highest possible >opinion about you. And I am almost certain that you are not here to belittle >someone like Bob. And because I am certain I told you now how that looked like. > >You are away for weeks and you come after Bob made such a bonmot. Instead of >clarifying things you ask him for his opinion but you want to insinuate that >this opinion in the bonmot was wrong. Is this the case, Fabien? > >Perhaps you know that I am really not a programmer. I'm just a chessplayer who >plays with chessprograms. Please let's not take this into deep in case I have >misunderstood something. Of course I'm absolutely ignorant about the relation >between you and Bob. I am sure not the one to decide how FRUIT is working. <g> > >I am a psychologist and saw something in your short remark. If I'm wrong I >apologize in advance. But if I had seen something correct then please try to >correct it, please. > >In slight tension waiting for your future plans for FRUIT, > >Rolf As an observer, I wish to comment. I read Fabien's question to Bob and took it exactly the opposite. Fabien was curious about an expert's opinion of his program in regards to the mobility and generally the strength of Fruit. I did not see it as baiting, critical or anything of the like. We all know Bob is legendary for achievements, approach, and selfless interest in other computer chess programmers. I would venture that more people world-wide have benefitted from Bob's comments about computer chess than any other living (or dead) cc expert with the exception of Claude Shannon. It is unprecedented that a former 2x-world-champ (in anything) steps down to help others as much as Bob. You just don't see it. I don't think anyone is foolish enough to bait Bob as we all know that a) he knows what he is talking about c-o-l-d and b) he is perfectly able to defend himself. Most professor types I know, and my best friend is a senior dual professor in the U.C. system here in California, are very able to argue at all levels up and down with anyone. In their areas of specialization be very careful about your contradictions because you will have to prove your point very well indeed. They live and breath the stuff of debate and argument as much as lawyers in court. Beyond this, Fabien's publication of Fruit code was openness incarnate. He earned his ability not to have to become "another Bob". Let Fabien be Fabien please. Both closed and open are right and necessary in the universe. Go study the I-Ching and Yin-Yang Rolf. Stuart
This page took 0.01 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.