Goodbye Talkchess

[bob]

I'll say this again, "Bob doesn't support the Ippo* development". I do not know what the thing is, nor where it came from.

It comes from a neverending stream of posts of yours that contain statements such as:

"I am completely unconcerned about the reverse-engineering that has been done. Seems like a fair way to "even the playing field" by forcing a secretive author to expose secrets he has desparately tried to hide by obfuscation of this PV, depth and node counter displays. I'm not going to lose any sleep over this at all. It isn't my concern..."

And that has exactly what to do with my _SUPPORTING_ Ippo*?

If you declared it a fair way to even the playing field, that is supportive of it.

fair 1 (fâr)
adj. fair·er, fair·est

Consistent with rules, logic, or ethics.

I believe I have been consistent. BTW, you say "never-ending" which is, of course, more than a "mild exaggeration". You might post the rest of that thread to provide the context, which will change the meaning of that statement just a bit. But then that would not help your agenda, would it?

[Graham Banks]

2) If Bob provides the evidence, then why is the WCCC allowing Rybka to participate? My understanding is only original works can play at WCCC.

This is just like the movie "Groundhog Day". Someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, then someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, repeat until you get tired and give up seems to be the point here.

I thought that WCCC were very stringent about such matters. Has anybody complained to them?

Cheers,
Graham.

[Robert Flesher]

And finally, where is the court case if Vas violated anything at all? Who are you to defame Vas although there is no sign for any juridical issue. Is this what you understand under the famous moral nobody shall be stamped guilty until he was condemned guilty? Why are you so prejudiced towards Vas - especially when all other commercial guys don't interest you at all? Couldn't you add some clear statements for me because I need them, just because you were always the highest role model out of computer chess for me...

My first question is:

1) Can Bob support that Rybka is a derivative of Fruit? If so, I would be interested in seeing it.

2) If Bob provides the evidence, then why is the WCCC allowing Rybka to participate? My understanding is only original works can play at WCCC.

Cordially,

Sean

The evidence has been provided! Yet it is swept under the mat.

This is just like the movie "Groundhog Day". Someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, then someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, repeat until you get tired and give up seems to be the point here.

Aye, agreed!

I think it almost time for the toaster to get dropped in the tub ?

[Frank Quisinsky]

Among the blind a one-eyed man is king.

[Frank Quisinsky]

Aber morgen schauen wir Fussball, gelle!

[bob]

2) If Bob provides the evidence, then why is the WCCC allowing Rybka to participate? My understanding is only original works can play at WCCC.

This is just like the movie "Groundhog Day". Someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, then someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, repeat until you get tired and give up seems to be the point here.

I thought that WCCC were very stringent about such matters. Has anybody complained to them?

Cheers,
Graham.

No idea, since I have not participated in one in a long while. I suppose someone _could_ if they saw fit, as it is a real issue.

[lmader]

Aber morgen schauen wir Fussball, gelle!

Alles hat ein Ende, nur die Wurst hat zwei.

[Graham Banks]

2) If Bob provides the evidence, then why is the WCCC allowing Rybka to participate? My understanding is only original works can play at WCCC.

This is just like the movie "Groundhog Day". Someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, then someone asks for the evidence, the link is posted, the evidence is discussed, repeat until you get tired and give up seems to be the point here.

I thought that WCCC were very stringent about such matters. Has anybody complained to them?

Cheers,
Graham.

No idea, since I have not participated in one in a long while. I suppose someone _could_ if they saw fit, as it is a real issue.

Then perhaps that would be the way to settle this long festering issue once and for all?

[Ralph Stoesser]

The clone detection test provide overwhelming evidence that OpenChess is a TalkChess clone. They use exactly the same board section names: General Topics, Programming and Technical Discussions, Tournaments and Matches. Coincidence? If you'd ask me, I'd say they are guilty.

[Rolf]

I only know what happened and have participated in discussions proving/discussing/disclosing the particulars. I have no standing to file a court case, and would not be interested in doing so since it is not my program, my problem, or my lack of ethics that led to this mess in the first place. Remember, _I_ did not copy anyone's source. I am just the messenger in this little fracus.

As a Christ you should know that pretending being sober and consistent, and nevertheless working with proven cloners, taking ideas from donating helpers for "open source crafty", on the bases of 80-90% of the code of forefathers in computerchess, is pure hypocrisy. As Albert showed you are well involved for a hate campaign but being asked you pretend indifference and lack of time and juristication, but why being in all the hate at all? Isnt it true if I concluded that you are only interested to grind an axe with Vas for reasons that remain in the clouds and could be assumed to be very personally motivated?

How come that you are so deeply obsessed by Vas and his business when you can well rely on money from university? As I said before, if you were consistent you would ask for the secrets of other business engines too, but you dont. Question is answered, why you are only focussed on Rybka and Vas. He knows something that you cant cope with despite hundreds of public hrelpers for open source Crafty. Again, as a Christ envy should never be the option. If you see something aggreeable in Norman, you should seek it in Vas too, if you have a minimally consistent ethical mind frame.