Author: Stephen A. Boak
Date: 02:21:41 02/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2006 at 03:44:37, Torstein Hall wrote: >We do talk about comersial programs all the time. Is Vas so different from the >others? (Maybee I can agree that the tread that was removed was over the limit, >but in my view the issue in itself was interesting.) >In my view the posts about Rybka are there because it simply is the strongest >program at the moment. Remember how many messages there was about Fruit or >Shredder when they was the strongest programs? Or perhaps CCC should we ban all >messages mentioning commercial programs? > >Torstein A funny thing happened on the way of this forum. Things have gotten out of control (moderator control and poster control). Don't worry about the trolls, however, they can take care of themselves. :) I am amazed at the overreaction of Mr. Skinner (& this is no knock on moderators performing their duties as best they see fit, Mr. Skinner included). Haven't seen it mentioned thus far, but not too long back (for those with decent memories, that is), Chessmaster program took this bulletin board by storm. I think it was CM6000, if I recall. There were gazillions of postings on Chessmaster, and zillions of those were on bugs in the program, bugs running on various hardware platforms, bugs running on various operating systems. [In some sense, the firestorm has not abated--there are gazillions of postings even today on CM9000 & CM10000, especially where personalities are being faithfully tested by the dedicated CM fans.] Back then, there were angry posters, angry with the bugs in their copies, angry with too many CM6000 postings, angry with paying for something that flat out wouldn't work on their systems. One of the development (or similar) team members of CM at the time (John Merlino) was kind enough to post and answer hundreds of user concerns--always very patiently, very professionally. He promised to forward confirmed reported errors to the programming team (& he did). He helped test for problems (to see if duplicatable & repeatable) & to develop or patiently explain workarounds until official CM patches were released (and there was no guarantee such patches would in fact be released). He posted unofficial dates for release of patches, and described the various fixes those patches would (or did) contain. He even accepted suggestions for functional improvements to the program or GUI and had several of them implemented by the programming team (including a couple submitted by yours truly). Chessmaster was owned by a series of companies, and has had the reputation for years of being the world's best selling chess program, bar none. It has literally sold millions of copies, IMO. No one has ever suggested that Chessmaster and its owner company was misusing this bulletin board for windfall profits, let alone for rape, pillaging, or other ill-gotten gains. :) I have heard, in the past, diatribes against Chessbase for having a *monopoly* and for its business practices and lack of customer support. Still hear a lot of that today (about the lack of customer support, mainly). But by & large, Chessbase is respected for what it offers, even if all readers do not 100% agree on the value of the products or features or the way in which CB conducts its business. In fact, Vasik is providing a competitive product, at a competitive price, to the market long dominated by CM, CB, Shredder, Tiger, and other programs. It is the work of genius to beat the pants off those other tough top commercial programs. And we all benefit--programs are stronger, analysis is better or more insightful, competition between programs remains keenly contested, and prices are kept down by the very act of providing a competitive new product at a reasonable price. No one ever suggested that John Merlino was blatantly breaking Rule#4 (to my recollection). No one ever suggested banning Mr. Merlino for his unstinting help on behalf of CM lovers all over the world. He provided patient explanations and performed laborious testing to help the users get the most possible value out of their chess programs. No one ever suggested that CM was blatantly commercializing their product in this forum, to the point of censoring Mr. Merlino. Hey guys, this is a chess programmers bulletin board! Shocking, isn't it, when an actual programmer or close member of the engine, GUI or book team takes time to forward notices of latest patches, latest releases, known improvements and features, and yes, known bugs and workaround fixes. Ohhh nooo, that is breaking Rule #4 these days. And is blatant to boot. ;) That's exactly what many of us want & expect--reports of the playing strength of software versions--from multi-personalities of CM programs to multi-beta versions of Rybka! We want reports of program bugs too, all of us. So we can avoid the frustration of acquiring a program that is 'too buggy' for our own tastes and hard earned dollars. So we can wait until the fixes come out and then jump in and acquire the product, knowing it will run on our hardware & operating systems. How ironic, then, when one moderator (and I generally like our moderators, even those who take the lead in moderation at times, and the heat to go with that) deems such help to the users to be offensive to this bulletin board and its owner (Mr. Steve Schwartz). Now, I'm not so silly or arrogantly presumptuous as to think that Mr. Schwartz is so bad at his business (even if business might happen to be a bit slow at times--competition is what it is, after all) that he needs unilateral *moderator* help to protect his own business & financial interests. I'm not against Rule #4, no problem with that. But isn't it rather high-handed indeed for a moderator to suggest that Mr. Schwartz isn't competent (or doesn't have competent legal advisers, contract writers, etc) enough to offer (at an arms-length negotiated quid pro quo price) to bring in a sales product to his ICD stores stable. As another reader pointed out, virtually all the posts were started by Rybka *fans* (just like CM fans in the past started innumerable posts on CM products & bugs & features & non-features). Fans are what make this bulletin board enjoyable--they are enthusiastic, passionate, prolific users & testers of *all* chess program products, and are not hesitant in the least to point out bugs, 'features', or to compare competing products for other users to learn where best to invest their limited chess product dollars. Vasik surely is not the big bad business wolf he is painted to be by Mr. Skinner, is he? He is not Chessmaster, selling millions of copies and making millions of dollars, is he? On a shoestring of sales, he supports his innumerable hours of programming for the sole benefit of us chess program users!! Why then are we so dour and unappreciative (some of us, obviously not all)? Where is the harm in answering questions, alerting to releases & new features (or bug fixes), and upcoming patches or Betas, just as CM through Mr. Merlino did for a long while in the earlier days of Chessmaster? And John Merlino & CM is not the only example. Formerly it was Ed Schroeder and his Rebel product, and Christopher Theron and his Chess Tiger product. And it has been & is Hiarcs and its team as well. Plus many others. I'm flabbergasted also by the number of trolls we encounter on this bulletin board. Hundreds of response posts are provided which fuel the fires of such trolls, and entertain their malignant hearts to the dismay of the entire readership (trolls excepted). We often give the trolls a mile or two of rope before we finally wise up and ban them. I can spot many of the trolls from the first posting (regardless of the 'handle of the day')--they adopt such simple, standard postures as to be readily discernible from the very 1st (or is it thousandth!) post. Yet we bow & scrape to them as though they were legitimate posters, all the while falling yet again for their repetitive nonsense. By contrast, however, we shoot first and ask questions later when it pertains to a highly respected, highly giving, chess product programmer who has already given us thousands of fun hours of chess games & analysis. No differently than have dozens of other talented programs and programming team reps over the years. What's wrong with this picture? You know & I know what's wrong. Unfortunately ego gets in the way of a retraction. Humility takes a back seat to ad hominem attack, when one's unilateral decisions are disagreed with. This is not conducive to a healthy bulletin board. Again, I am not condemning any moderator from doing the best job he/she can. That requires 'management' decisions, including the making of some mistakes from time to time. And the taking of heat thereafter. That goes with moderator turf (taking some heat). Nothing new there. So now is the time to back off of the ad hominem attacks when criticized, time to show a bit of humility (I know it's hard--it's certainly hard for me when I do something silly & take some heat for it), time to admit at least that others may not see things as I do, and to let the flames & friction subside. We not only do not need a flame-head for a moderator, we do not need posters who taunt and prod in the attempt to make a moderator lose his cool. All of us ought to grow up (even the adults!) and show a bit of human respect for our fellow enthusiasts, whether they are moderators, users, testers, programmers, GUI makers, Book makers, or simply chess players who like what computer programs can bring to the sport. We should show respect even to those whose opinions we disagree with (criticize the idea only, not the person). Too often we aggrandize our replies with some personal jibe or name-calling. Sadly, it lowers ourself when we throw muck on another--we jump into the same miasma and abandon the high (moral) ground. It's too easy to hide behind the anonymity of a bulletin board handle and take pot shots at anyone (moderator or regular poster), rather than forgive & forget. It's too easy to stand on the soap box podium of a moderator position and snipe at any & all hecklers, whether well meaning or not. Authority of position is *not* the same as moral high ground--one should never confuse the two. Ladies & gentlemen, lend me your ears. Best regards, sincerely to all, including all moderators (Mr. Skinner, too). Respectfully yours, --Steve
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.