Author: Majd Al-Ansari
Date: 02:38:30 02/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
Pete, I think you are way out of line. Although it might seem frustrating for you and others that posts about Rybka seem to be flooding the forums ... there is a very good reason for that. Rybka, although not yet totally mature, has the opportunity of revolutionizing computer chess and maybe chess as a whole. I know that it has definetely rekindled my personal interest in chess. What Vas was trying to do is put a feeler on what people would think of different avenues of paying for a chess engine service. One that would continually give incentive for the engine creator to improve on his original design. I see nothing wrong with that. You can give your opinion that it is not good or give an opinion that you like the idea. What you cannot do is sit there and say it is a commercial attempt to get money. If you did then you would have to basically make it so that ANY post about an engine that is not free is a violation. The form of payment that was described could apply to Shredder or Hiarcs or any of the other commercial engines if the authors deemed it is beneficial. Rybka and Fruit have shaken up the computer chess world and in the process have given free engines that are superior than ANY commercial. Let's not shoot ourselves in the foot by attacking the very few that really have something to offer. On February 12, 2006 at 13:32:33, Peter Skinner wrote: >This is nothing more than a flagrant attempt in polling users about possible >commercial payment possibilities for your program, and as such I am removing the >thread. > >As per the charter: > >Once a member gains access to the message board, he may read all messages and >post new or response messages with the proviso that these new or response >messages: > > 1. Are, within reason, on the topic of computer chess > 2. Are not abusive in nature > 3. Do not contain personal and/or libelous attacks on others > 4. Are not flagrant commercial exhortations > 5. Are not of questionable legal status. > >What about rule #4 do you not understand? > >Peter
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.