On discussing clones

[mclane]

thanks Norman. very good point.

[Rolf]

That's pretty funny. Because the _sole_ reason CCC was created was to escape your incessant drivel, 10 page posts that said nothing, character attacks, etc. If CCC were "better moderated" you would not even be here now...

That's interesting. Ed argued that you would probably be much more concerned and thankful für good moderation if someone claimed that you had bought your professor title. Then I agree with Ed and ask you to please reconsider because I am very happy with moderation in CCC in difference to rgcc where I personally was character assassinated with the assault that I had cheated, faked or misused academic titles in Germany, a relevant criminal allegation, and you are laughing. Have you no sense for illegal attacks on people like Vas or me?

I know the fairy tale that CCC was created because of me but it's a fairy tale. The opposite is true. I can behave under whatever charter and could also behave under the alleged freedom of rgcc. But programmers cant and that is why CCC was created. Some people called even for anonymity here. I tolerate the extra freedom but not if it's misused for personal attacks.

In the cloner debate I see very few programmers who accuse Vasik/Rybka but they have not shown a case. The emotional side is that Vas simply remains silent while these few programmers had hoped that Vas were forced to declare himself if only some allegations without legal consequences had been uttered. But Bob, I ask you again, if here two programmers doubted my academical title, would that mean that I had to prove anything. Not in my books!

It's very wrong to believe that outside the special programmer sub part in CCC the programmers as such had also advantage in arguments on the general part of CCC. What is it that you know better than me in questions of say Majmedarov forfait because he accused someone of cheating? I play against the software you and your collegues have created. So what is the reason to discriminate me for the general forum part? Or for the political side forum CTF??

How come that in private exchanges you always remain polite and helpful while you insult me in a very patronizing manner in public? Why such a double standard?

I have no problem to admit that I see you as a sort of hero in the whole field, where we have a dissent it's always in political or social questions. What has this to do with computerchess?

Bob, I wished to live in peace with you. Please be fair towards Vasik! Thanks. He's the genius you probably were thirty years ago! What is so wrong with it? In thirty years, when we are gone, Vas will certainly educate others on the net. But for now he has no time to explain the details to you. Leave him alone!

Peace!

[Rolf]

... If CCC were "better moderated" you would not even be here now...

And if the trolls were not continuously feed for more than ten years by leading members of the chess community -for example you- that problem wouldn't exist at all.


In case of interest: At the moment the mods are discussion methods how to handle clone accusations from now on.

Volker-

i assume you mean 'fed'...

it doesn't seem appropriate for you, or the 'mods' (or anybody IMHO) to characterize any user here as a 'troll' (i assume you mean Rolf?) or anything else for that matter...
IMHO, it shows a general contempt for differing opinions...everybody (troll or not) should have an opportunity to be heard (if within the guidelines). shouldn't you mods remain impartial (or at least moderate)?

conversely, i have witnessed Bob consistently, time and time again, exhibiting the patience of a saint ...respectfully and generously answering each and every (troll) post, giving them at least the minimum of human respect...with a dignified answer.

and you're faulting him for that? i.e. the repressive atmosphere here and/or the 'troll' problem is somehow his fault?

i realize his post was critical of the mods...

? i find this a rather despicable accusation against one of the few here who consitently remain level-headed and courteous to all...

Thankful tip to hat for that decent message. Although I want to defend Volker who might have forgotten the many computerchess contributions I have published from my experience of playing myself against computer programs or formerly the wooden boards of Ed and others. Just take a look into Google. Header "Computerchess Misc Part..." for example.

See http://groups.google.de/group/rec.games ... ter&q=Misc

A concrete message:

http://groups.google.de/group/rec.games ... ad932738a8

Everybody is free to further search such messages. In the light of such messages it's perhaps understandable why I feel insulted if some repeat the fairy tale that I wrote nothing but personal attacks.

All the best to you.

[hawkeye]

to reply to Mr conkies comment:

I never made any mention of tourneys or anything of that sort.My point was that regardless as to a clone is legal and lawful or not according to the GPL that the programmers releasing these clones were being ridiculed.

As far as to what is legitimate and what is original. I fail to see any connection as far as what is original and what is legal when it comes to this as long as the GPL is not violated.And as far as those people who seek originality goes, they must have a serious problem with the GPL to begin with.

I am not trying to legitimize anything, nor do i have any power or authority to. Which is why the GPL exists.

I never made any mention of originality any where in the post.

best wishes to all, steve

[bob]

... If CCC were "better moderated" you would not even be here now...

And if the trolls were not continuously feed for more than ten years by leading members of the chess community -for example you- that problem wouldn't exist at all.


In case of interest: At the moment the mods are discussion methods how to handle clone accusations from now on.

Volker-

i assume you mean 'fed'...

it doesn't seem appropriate for you, or the 'mods' (or anybody IMHO) to characterize any user here as a 'troll' (i assume you mean Rolf?) or anything else for that matter...
IMHO, it shows a general contempt for differing opinions...everybody (troll or not) should have an opportunity to be heard (if within the guidelines). shouldn't you mods remain impartial (or at least moderate)?

conversely, i have witnessed Bob consistently, time and time again, exhibiting the patience of a saint ...respectfully and generously answering each and every (troll) post, giving them at least the minimum of human respect...with a dignified answer.

and you're faulting him for that? i.e. the repressive atmosphere here and/or the 'troll' problem is somehow his fault?

i realize his post was critical of the mods...

? i find this a rather despicable accusation against one of the few here who consitently remain level-headed and courteous to all...

Thankful tip to hat for that decent message. Although I want to defend Volker who might have forgotten the many computerchess contributions I have published from my experience of playing myself against computer programs or formerly the wooden boards of Ed and others. Just take a look into Google. Header "Computerchess Misc Part..." for example.

See http://groups.google.de/group/rec.games ... ter&q=Misc

A concrete message:

http://groups.google.de/group/rec.games ... ad932738a8

Everybody is free to further search such messages. In the light of such messages it's perhaps understandable why I feel insulted if some repeat the fairy tale that I wrote nothing but personal attacks.


I did not say you wrote "nothing but personal attacks." I said you wrote many personal attacks, and to that you added hundreds of posts, multiple pages long, which said absolutely nothing of interest with regard to computer chess...


All the best to you.

[bob]

That's pretty funny. Because the _sole_ reason CCC was created was to escape your incessant drivel, 10 page posts that said nothing, character attacks, etc. If CCC were "better moderated" you would not even be here now...

I am very happy that i can quote you and don't have to write this myself

[bob]

That's pretty funny. Because the _sole_ reason CCC was created was to escape your incessant drivel, 10 page posts that said nothing, character attacks, etc. If CCC were "better moderated" you would not even be here now...

That's interesting. Ed argued that you would probably be much more concerned and thankful für good moderation if someone claimed that you had bought your professor title. Then I agree with Ed and ask you to please reconsider because I am very happy with moderation in CCC in difference to rgcc where I personally was character assassinated with the assault that I had cheated, faked or misused academic titles in Germany, a relevant criminal allegation, and you are laughing. Have you no sense for illegal attacks on people like Vas or me?

Once again, you go into "mode hyperbole". Where was Vas "attacked"? The discussions have been about Rybka's origin, which is pretty clear to many of us. It is not a personal attack at all and your saying it is will not change a thing. I also like the old "misery loves company" approach where you try to lump yourself in with Vas.

I know the fairy tale that CCC was created because of me but it's a fairy tale. The opposite is true. I can behave under whatever charter and could also behave under the alleged freedom of rgcc. But programmers cant and that is why CCC was created. Some people called even for anonymity here. I tolerate the extra freedom but not if it's misused for personal attacks.

I am one of the ten original founders of CCC. I claim it was created _specifically_ to get away from your high volume of random noise and personal attacks on r.g.c.c. I have the original email discussions where we debated starting CCC, and how some of us _hated_ the interface which is horribly clunky compared to good threaded news readers. And I can _guarantee_ you that the content of the old emails clearly shows why CCC was formed. Here's a hint: I only looked at the first 50 or so, but there was not a single one that didn't have your name it it...

In the cloner debate I see very few programmers who accuse Vasik/Rybka but they have not shown a case. The emotional side is that Vas simply remains silent while these few programmers had hoped that Vas were forced to declare himself if only some allegations without legal consequences had been uttered. But Bob, I ask you again, if here two programmers doubted my academical title, would that mean that I had to prove anything. Not in my books!

I have my own suspicion of the reason for the "deafening silence". As for whether you would defend yourself or not, that is a personal choice. For me, it would depend on who was involved and whether I really cared what they think about me or not...

It's very wrong to believe that outside the special programmer sub part in CCC the programmers as such had also advantage in arguments on the general part of CCC. What is it that you know better than me in questions of say Majmedarov forfait because he accused someone of cheating? I play against the software you and your collegues have created. So what is the reason to discriminate me for the general forum part? Or for the political side forum CTF??

I have no idea what you are talking about. And no post of mine in this thread is related to any part of the computer cheating discussion.. This has been about the ability to discuss clone issues, the quick-trigger-finger the moderators seem to have with respect to deleting any such post, apparently out of fear of some sort of legal reprisal which simply is not possible.

How come that in private exchanges you always remain polite and helpful while you insult me in a very patronizing manner in public? Why such a double standard?

Pot. Kettle. I gave you a reasonable chance and tried to answer your questions and have discussions with you here. But when the Rybka thread first started, you went into full "attack mode" and at that point in time, I gave up and decided "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me." I'm not going to be fooled twice into entering discussions that will one day turn sour.

I have no problem to admit that I see you as a sort of hero in the whole field, where we have a dissent it's always in political or social questions. What has this to do with computerchess?

Bob, I wished to live in peace with you. Please be fair towards Vasik! Thanks. He's the genius you probably were thirty years ago! What is so wrong with it? In thirty years, when we are gone, Vas will certainly educate others on the net. But for now he has no time to explain the details to you. Leave him alone!

Peace!

I have no interest in being "unfair" to anyone. However, I have seen enough in this particular debate to make up my mind that "something is wrong". As to his "educating" in the future, what do you base that on? He hasn't exactly educated anyone up to this point, other than in showing various ways to mangle program output to make it harder to interpret. And perhaps in how to copy parts of a program and make something even better...

[bob]

to reply to Mr conkies comment:

I never made any mention of tourneys or anything of that sort.My point was that regardless as to a clone is legal and lawful or not according to the GPL that the programmers releasing these clones were being ridiculed.

As far as to what is legitimate and what is original. I fail to see any connection as far as what is original and what is legal when it comes to this as long as the GPL is not violated.And as far as those people who seek originality goes, they must have a serious problem with the GPL to begin with.

I am not trying to legitimize anything, nor do i have any power or authority to. Which is why the GPL exists.

I never made any mention of originality any where in the post.

best wishes to all, steve

You are mixing apples and oranges. Many people have, in the past, asked if it was ok to modify Crafty (or other open-source programs) in any way they wanted, and use it in any way they wanted. We have all been consistent in answering "yes, but note that you can never use that program in an organized tournament because it is against the rules." And those people have _not_ been castigated or ridiculed for doing that.

But others have taken an open source program, modified it, and then claimed the result to be their own new and original engine. And they _do_ get castigated for such actions, as they should. Some don't even modify the program, just change the name and then "this is now my work..."

Those are two vastly different cases. The former is encouraged. The latter is despised...

And there is a difference in the two...

[Rolf]

That's pretty funny. Because the _sole_ reason CCC was created was to escape your incessant drivel, 10 page posts that said nothing, character attacks, etc. If CCC were "better moderated" you would not even be here now...

That's interesting. Ed argued that you would probably be much more concerned and thankful für good moderation if someone claimed that you had bought your professor title. Then I agree with Ed and ask you to please reconsider because I am very happy with moderation in CCC in difference to rgcc where I personally was character assassinated with the assault that I had cheated, faked or misused academic titles in Germany, a relevant criminal allegation, and you are laughing. Have you no sense for illegal attacks on people like Vas or me?

Once again, you go into "mode hyperbole". Where was Vas "attacked"? The discussions have been about Rybka's origin, which is pretty clear to many of us. It is not a personal attack at all and your saying it is will not change a thing. I also like the old "misery loves company" approach where you try to lump yourself in with Vas.

I know the fairy tale that CCC was created because of me but it's a fairy tale. The opposite is true. I can behave under whatever charter and could also behave under the alleged freedom of rgcc. But programmers cant and that is why CCC was created. Some people called even for anonymity here. I tolerate the extra freedom but not if it's misused for personal attacks.

I am one of the ten original founders of CCC. I claim it was created _specifically_ to get away from your high volume of random noise and personal attacks on r.g.c.c. I have the original email discussions where we debated starting CCC, and how some of us _hated_ the interface which is horribly clunky compared to good threaded news readers. And I can _guarantee_ you that the content of the old emails clearly shows why CCC was formed. Here's a hint: I only looked at the first 50 or so, but there was not a single one that didn't have your name it it...

In the cloner debate I see very few programmers who accuse Vasik/Rybka but they have not shown a case. The emotional side is that Vas simply remains silent while these few programmers had hoped that Vas were forced to declare himself if only some allegations without legal consequences had been uttered. But Bob, I ask you again, if here two programmers doubted my academical title, would that mean that I had to prove anything. Not in my books!

I have my own suspicion of the reason for the "deafening silence". As for whether you would defend yourself or not, that is a personal choice. For me, it would depend on who was involved and whether I really cared what they think about me or not...

It's very wrong to believe that outside the special programmer sub part in CCC the programmers as such had also advantage in arguments on the general part of CCC. What is it that you know better than me in questions of say Majmedarov forfait because he accused someone of cheating? I play against the software you and your collegues have created. So what is the reason to discriminate me for the general forum part? Or for the political side forum CTF??

I have no idea what you are talking about. And no post of mine in this thread is related to any part of the computer cheating discussion.. This has been about the ability to discuss clone issues, the quick-trigger-finger the moderators seem to have with respect to deleting any such post, apparently out of fear of some sort of legal reprisal which simply is not possible.

How come that in private exchanges you always remain polite and helpful while you insult me in a very patronizing manner in public? Why such a double standard?

Pot. Kettle. I gave you a reasonable chance and tried to answer your questions and have discussions with you here. But when the Rybka thread first started, you went into full "attack mode" and at that point in time, I gave up and decided "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me." I'm not going to be fooled twice into entering discussions that will one day turn sour.

I have no problem to admit that I see you as a sort of hero in the whole field, where we have a dissent it's always in political or social questions. What has this to do with computerchess?

Bob, I wished to live in peace with you. Please be fair towards Vasik! Thanks. He's the genius you probably were thirty years ago! What is so wrong with it? In thirty years, when we are gone, Vas will certainly educate others on the net. But for now he has no time to explain the details to you. Leave him alone!

Peace!

I have no interest in being "unfair" to anyone. However, I have seen enough in this particular debate to make up my mind that "something is wrong". As to his "educating" in the future, what do you base that on? He hasn't exactly educated anyone up to this point, other than in showing various ways to mangle program output to make it harder to interpret. And perhaps in how to copy parts of a program and make something even better...

The answer is easy and painful for you: Vasik, please look at the webpages from his father and brothers and his wife. His father is professor at a univerity in the USA, his brothers all have their own brilliancies and he himself is CC World Champion and owning the very best CC software on the planet. He is an IM and also his wife!

In short, Vasik has the genius in his guts and you have no other choice than respecting that. Normally in art and science, the genius is respecting his brothers in the outstanding talents family. Just IMO Bob, but since you are our psychologist make your final verdict. Or let's make peace please.

As to your statement of my attack mode, you have your data wrong. I went in that mode in exactly the moment longer ago when I read how Christophe Theron wrote against Vasik, in saying that if he woldnt be adapted to respecting ethical limits then he would also be in the situation of Vasik with a number one program, but he himself would have a minimum of respect. Something like that. Bob, and you buddied with Christopher. That is mainly the reason for my opposition. Because, if this wasnt a premature final verdict without a case then I dont know anything about logic. But this is very improbable because in Germany academic institutions thought that my logic were sufficently developped.

It's true that CT has retired now, also because I made clear that in Europe he had to face some juridical consequences if he continued such a character assassination against Vas. You ask in innocence where Vas was attacked in personal, for all it's worth you got the answer now. And in Europe this all could well be leading into jail, not for you or the other Americans but for those whose countries belong to our EU. From Ireland to France incl. La Ile de Reunion. Trust me.

Apart from this I am an absolute lay in computerchess programming. I always excused myself for that failure.

[Rolf]

[I did not say you wrote "nothing but personal attacks." I said you wrote many personal attacks, and to that you added hundreds of posts, multiple pages long, which said absolutely nothing of interest with regard to computer chess...

I apologize if I made you angry with such an output but I cant resist in making you feel ashamed by informing you that my failures in your eyes were my personal saving me from an almost hopeless situation. I apologize again but I claim not being guilty after I had experienced the sanity the communication gave me back, and in first place the debates with you and other known names that I had already met in theory through my lectures. Are you sure you dont want that I empathize my deep thanks for your unconcious contributions for me at the time? Are you that cruel?

Yes, and I also want to excuse if I had myself hurt anybody with my played critic games of an alleged 22 year old fellow. I see a relative guilt then on your sides because how could you believe that a 22 y old German were anywhere involved into such a difficult field as "medizin_kunstfehler"?

But who played dirty? I, who used the net debates for my social rehabilitation process or you who then and now showed ignorance and a lack of interest to the true social situation of your correspondents? With you I dont mean the singular Bob alone. I mean everybody who supported the scapegoat witch hunting. In case of further ignorance just ask CW for details, he understood in the end what has happened without even knowing what I now told you above.

I ask you again, make a peace and give me a fair chance to enjoy your debates from a farther distance but please stop your mean diffamations as if this was all only a funny game. You once mentioned your Sunday religious ceremonies. Please keep them in mind and show some humility towards a correspondent so far away from you and with such a different personality.

If you gave me peace of mind others would follow you and hence I could take a step back. Just say the magic Peace Accepted and see what happens.