Is this truthfully?

[De Vos W]

thorstenczub wrote:

The rating list guys have to make nice negotiations/companionship with the companies/programmers who deliver the engines. especially the commercial engines/programmers make pressure on the rating list guys, some pressure diplomatic, some pressure between the lines,
that they should not "support" these engines.
some pressure is done not directly but by people from the surrounding of the programmer working field, the so called water-bearers (in german: wasserträger).
they are often right hand of programmers, operate the programs, control the forums,
some are even admins at playchess etc.

together with the mc_carthy-like computerchess police this creates the witch hunts
the strange censorship in some commercial forums such as hiarcs forum,
rybka forum, talkchess (CCC) etc.

welcome back in the mc carthy times of USA in the 50th year of the 20th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

these things are as old as computerchess rating lists exists.
and the criticism to this is also as old.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

Wouldn't worry Adam. There are a few nutters in all walks of life.

Unfortunately Mr Banks, too much of the time you are more interested in attacking than in debating, conclusion here, talk sence to a fool and he calls
you foolish! Euripides said this in 460BC. You should read this guy! Perhaps while testing Houdini for a change.

[De Vos W]

...
Really amusing. I wonder in what way I could be pressured by commercial groups.

Never forget the millions of dollars, houses, and trips around the world we already got at common WinBoard times.

Now such experts as Walter, Ruxy and the genius Czub are around to disclose our dirty secrets to the world.

I'm going to drink good glass of wine now and enjoy a good game of poker.

Regards

Its much simpler, what about a Rybka DVD or download for free ?

"A 'child's hand was filled .......

[Sylwy]

Now such experts as Walter, Ruxy and the genius Czub are around to disclose our dirty secrets to the world.

Herr Pittlik ,

After I have had a test about the gravity law ( ) , my expertise about CCCs (computer chess cakes , sorry , commercial ) frightful increased !



Expert regards,
Silvian

[De Vos W]

...
Really amusing. I wonder in what way I could be pressured by commercial groups.

Never forget the millions of dollars, houses, and trips around the world we already got at common WinBoard times.

Now such experts as Walter, Ruxy and the genius Czub are around to disclose our dirty secrets to the world.

I'm going to drink good glass of wine now and enjoy a good game of poker.

Regards

Its much simpler, what about a Rybka DVD or download for free ?

That is your level, Walter. We are not that cheap.

Oh! what a stab right in my heart.
I see, in your eyes after all Vasik Rajlich's Rybka is just a cheap piece of ....
You must have a hard time finding levels to satisfy you?
Congratulations on that record.

[De Vos W]

thorstenczub wrote:

The rating list guys have to make nice negotiations/companionship with the companies/programmers who deliver the engines. especially the commercial engines/programmers make pressure on the rating list guys, some pressure diplomatic, some pressure between the lines,
that they should not "support" these engines.
some pressure is done not directly but by people from the surrounding of the programmer working field, the so called water-bearers (in german: wasserträger).
they are often right hand of programmers, operate the programs, control the forums,
some are even admins at playchess etc.

together with the mc_carthy-like computerchess police this creates the witch hunts
the strange censorship in some commercial forums such as hiarcs forum,
rybka forum, talkchess (CCC) etc.

welcome back in the mc carthy times of USA in the 50th year of the 20th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism

these things are as old as computerchess rating lists exists.
and the criticism to this is also as old.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory

Nice

[De Vos W]

So why not test all the new engines?

[Volker Pittlik]

So why not test all the new engines?

Why not eat s%*& ?

200 trillion flies can't be wrong.

[Adam Hair]

So why not test all the new engines?

I am trying to test all new free engines. That means I do not
focus on engines in just one part of the elo ratings. Also, I try to test
engines that have an indentifiable author, such as:

Gaviota - Miguel Ballicora
Sjakk - Jacob Boers Lind
Rodin - Fermin Serrano
Pawny - Mincho Georgiev
Myrddin - John Merlino

and so on.

If you throw out any concerns about Ippolit's origins, we are left with
the fact that the authors are hiding behind pseudonyms and a farce of
a website. So I am reluctant to spend much time testing it or its
derivatives.

That leaves Houdini. Nobody but Robert Houdart knows how much
Ippolit/Robbolito code is in Houdini. He has no plans to release the
source until next year. His reasons for doing this could be interpreted
more than one way. So, I believe I will wait for him to release the
source before I test Houdini with earnest.

Why doesn't anybody complain that Avi Chess ( Michel Gaillard ),
Butterfly ( Giuseppe Cannella ), Magnum ( Eric Stock ) and other
engines have not been tested by the CCRL? What is the motivation
for the level of focus on Ippolit/Robbolito/Ivanhoe/Fire? Is it because
many people would rather associate themselves with something at
the very top in strength rather than build something new? I believe
that several people who are working on these engines could actually
write their own engine. But it would take much work to start from
scratch. Perhaps more than they are interested in doing. I do not
look upon with disdain anybody who tries to improve something that
already exists. Some people are good at creating new things, and
some people are good at improving existing things. I am troubled
by the fact that many people have chosen to focus on these engines
only because they are so strong. There is many more engines out
there.

As far as the origin of this thread, I have seen no evidence of collusion
between commercial authors and testers to exclude certain engines.
Some people have made up their minds not to test those engines based
on their personal thoughts and motivations, not due to pressure from
commercial authors.

[Steve B]

Some people have made up their minds not to test those engines based
on their personal thoughts and motivations, not due to pressure from
commercial authors.

as is your perfect right to do
although it would probably make some sense for the two major testing groups to at least make a "policy statement" on their web sites regarding the testing of Ippo and family engines
after all ..its not as if one member of the group chooses to test the Ippo engines then his results will be posted and incorporated into the rating lists .it wouldn't be
there must be some policy that the group members decided upon
no harm in making that policy known and public on their web page
the Great Derivatives Debate is certainly a big enough issue and has been around long enough now for the groups to at least make a mention/comment about them

Regards
Steve

[hgm]

I don't understand why these discussions are recurring all the time. If people want to know ratings for these illegal clones, let them determine these ratings themselves. That is not so hard to do. Just let them play a few hundred games against other top engines, and run the results through BayesElo together with the other CCRL games, and you have your rating...

Those people are just freetards, wanting other people to do all the work for them, not competent themselves to do anything but foulmouth those who do not wish to comply with their absurd demands...