Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:00:26 01/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 23, 2000 at 11:16:50, Chris Carson wrote: >Dr Hyatt, > >I remember the CCC discussions. Since you are quoting >someone else, please post your source so that everyone >can review. If you have no source, then please state as >"opinion only", everything that can not be verified is >only speculation or hearsay, not fact. It is hearsay to you. It was written here and I mentioned that. My memory is good enough to recall the discussion. Just not the actual person that wrote it. The poster was reporting on a talk given by Hsu or Campbell at a location that was close enough for him to attend. It could have been one of several different people, since I think Bruce heard a talk at microsoft. Others heard the talk at other places... > It is your responsibility >to post the source if you use a quote or make a reference. It is >not the responsibility of the reader to find your source or >to take your word for it. No researcher gets a free ticket and >all research should be scrutinized. > >Science is how you study a subject, here is the scientific method: > >Questions >Review the current literature (published, with sources listed) >Hypothesis (statement of prediction)/research questions >Methodology (testing hypothesis) >Results (summary of what was found and what it means) >Discussion (new questions about topic and limitations of study) > >source: Melody Huffman, PHD, Amber University, Research Methods > Professor, "Walking through research", 1988. > >weblink Amber University: http://www.amberu.edu/ > >Oh, I have published three articles in the Texas Instruments >Technical Journal and I have completed graduate courses in >research methods and statistics. I also hold a graduate degree. > >Best Regards, >Chris Carson I have published about 50 technical articles in various journals and conference proceedings. What has that to do with anything here? I have given lots of precise details. That seems to hold little weight for those not wanting to accept DB/DT as the best there is by a wide margin. I have posted game by game, DTs results vs micros. Citing the year and the opponent for each game. the result was 10-1 wins vs losses against micros, in ACM and WCCC events. Yet the 10-0 and 38-2 results seem to cause everyone problems, even though a similar result is part of the public record. IE facts don't seem to account for much here, sometimes... And if I spent the time to dredge thru the archive to find the post, you would likely have the same comment: It is hearsay... it was person X reporting on what Hsu or Campbell said at a public talk. I won't accept it until they say it here directly... and we are back at square 1. I choose to not waste that much effort for zero results...
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.