BB+ on the matter

[Roger Brown]

[SNIP]

When an unproven wrongdoing is discussed as though it were proven I would categorize it as being in the company with slander, libel and defamation of charcter.

Hello Dann,

Does this standard of outlook hold for anonymous authors accused of reverse engineering the most powerful (electronic) chess entity at the present time?

Later.

[Dann Corbit]

[SNIP]

When an unproven wrongdoing is discussed as though it were proven I would categorize it as being in the company with slander, libel and defamation of charcter.

Hello Dann,

Does this standard of outlook hold for anonymous authors accused of reverse engineering the most powerful (electronic) chess entity at the present time?

Later.

This standard of outlook holds for everyone, for me.
Convictions belong in a court of law, not in a computer chess forum.

On the other hand, discussion of facts is totally fine with me, including such things as found by Zach etc.

My problem is the drawing of conclusions and then postulation upon these conclusions in an open forum when someone else's reputation is at stake.

It is fine (IMO) to say that Vas used a nearly identical UCI parser to that found in fruit, based upon the reverse engineering efforst we have seen displayed.

It is fine to say that Ippolit shares Rybka's material imbalance methods because of the evidence presented.

It is not fine to say that either group is guilty of a crime or that they are reprehensible people.

I do have my own opinions about such things, but I do not think that "trial by newsgroup" is a particularly good idea.

I would venture to say that nobody here (including myself) is an expert of software law. Hence for us to draw conclusions about the software practices engaged in by members of our community is mostly a bad idea.

IMO-YMMV

[Milos]

This standard of outlook holds for everyone, for me.
Convictions belong in a court of law, not in a computer chess forum.

On the other hand, discussion of facts is totally fine with me, including such things as found by Zach etc.

My problem is the drawing of conclusions and then postulation upon these conclusions in an open forum when someone else's reputation is at stake.

It is fine (IMO) to say that Vas used a nearly identical UCI parser to that found in fruit, based upon the reverse engineering efforst we have seen displayed.

It is fine to say that Ippolit shares Rybka's material imbalance methods because of the evidence presented.

It is not fine to say that either group is guilty of a crime or that they are reprehensible people.

I do have my own opinions about such things, but I do not think that "trial by newsgroup" is a particularly good idea.

I would venture to say that nobody here (including myself) is an expert of software law. Hence for us to draw conclusions about the software practices engaged in by members of our community is mostly a bad idea.

Your stated points look fine in theory. You do follow them on paper. However, your acting (or non-acting) in reality actually gives away your opinion about the matter and also prejudice that you certainly have.
More precisely, you have chosen to react only now, when there are a lot of accusations against Vas and just now you are calling for respecting only facts and avoiding mudslinging and false accusation.
However, you've never before reacted in the same way when Ippo and all derivative where numerously called clones, products of reverse engineering, called all possible filthy names, accused of all possible mischief and uncountable lies presented as pure facts.
Your unequal reaction (or lack of reaction in the past) clearly demonstrates your bias towards Vas and prejudice against Ippo even though your are putting an effort to hide it.

[Dann Corbit]

This standard of outlook holds for everyone, for me.
Convictions belong in a court of law, not in a computer chess forum.

On the other hand, discussion of facts is totally fine with me, including such things as found by Zach etc.

My problem is the drawing of conclusions and then postulation upon these conclusions in an open forum when someone else's reputation is at stake.

It is fine (IMO) to say that Vas used a nearly identical UCI parser to that found in fruit, based upon the reverse engineering efforst we have seen displayed.

It is fine to say that Ippolit shares Rybka's material imbalance methods because of the evidence presented.

It is not fine to say that either group is guilty of a crime or that they are reprehensible people.

I do have my own opinions about such things, but I do not think that "trial by newsgroup" is a particularly good idea.

I would venture to say that nobody here (including myself) is an expert of software law. Hence for us to draw conclusions about the software practices engaged in by members of our community is mostly a bad idea.

Your stated points look fine in theory. You do follow them on paper. However, your acting (or non-acting) in reality actually gives away your opinion about the matter and also prejudice that you certainly have.
More precisely, you have chosen to react only now, when there are a lot of accusations against Vas and just now you are calling for respecting only facts and avoiding mudslinging and false accusation.
However, you've never before reacted in the same way when Ippo and all derivative where numerously called clones, products of reverse engineering, called all possible filthy names, accused of all possible mischief and uncountable lies presented as pure facts.
Your unequal reaction (or lack of reaction in the past) clearly demonstrates your bias towards Vas and prejudice against Ippo even though your are putting an effort to hide it.

A simple search of this newsgroup will show that you are wrong.
However, there are some people who are simply unconvinceable, regardless of whatever facts are present.

Many people who post here make strong opinions with little or no factual basis and because of emotional outburst they are willing to impugne the reputation of other people. To me, these people are the short people of Randy Newman's song.
http://www.sing365.com/music/lyric.nsf/ ... 370048b6fa

[Milos]

A simple search of this newsgroup will show that you are wrong.
However, there are some people who are simply unconvinceable, regardless of whatever facts are present.

You did not present any facts. You only give concise answers worthless in any serious discussion.
The fact is that you are pro Vas biased. The fact is that the ban on Ippo in your moderation term was mostly your call. You were the one convincing other moderators and enforcing the rules. There are proofs of that in moderators forum.
Of course, it's easy to pretend, deny or hide your real attitude, your are certainly smart enough for that, but to anyone that is actually following this forum long enough this is crystal clear.

[mhull]

A simple search of this newsgroup will show that you are wrong.
However, there are some people who are simply unconvinceable, regardless of whatever facts are present.

You did not present any facts. You only give concise answers worthless in any serious discussion.
The fact is that you are pro Vas biased. The fact is that the ban on Ippo in your moderation term was mostly your call. You were the one convincing other moderators and enforcing the rules. There are proofs of that in moderators forum.
Of course, it's easy to pretend, deny or hide your real attitude, your are certainly smart enough for that, but to anyone that is actually following this forum long enough this is crystal clear.

I would hesitate to put it so strongly in Dann's case, because we often think we are being even handed, even if objectively we are not. I don't know if Dann cast doubt on Vas for giving no evidence (I haven't looked and I don't remember). But he might remember it that way, even if it didn't happen that way, or his current views might overshadow former views he has forgotten that he held.

IMHO, YMMV.

[Dann Corbit]

A simple search of this newsgroup will show that you are wrong.
However, there are some people who are simply unconvinceable, regardless of whatever facts are present.

You did not present any facts. You only give concise answers worthless in any serious discussion.
The fact is that you are pro Vas biased. The fact is that the ban on Ippo in your moderation term was mostly your call. You were the one convincing other moderators and enforcing the rules. There are proofs of that in moderators forum.
Of course, it's easy to pretend, deny or hide your real attitude, your are certainly smart enough for that, but to anyone that is actually following this forum long enough this is crystal clear.

I would hesitate to put it so strongly in Dann's case, because we often think we are being even handed, even if objectively we are not. I don't know if Dann cast doubt on Vas for giving no evidence (I haven't looked and I don't remember). But he might remember it that way, even if it didn't happen that way, or his current views might overshadow former views he has forgotten that he held.

IMHO, YMMV.

I will not cast doubts on a person because they did not prove their innocence. The burden of proof is upon the accusers.

Personally, as I have stated many times, I do not know whether or not Vas has done something wrong. I also do not know whether or not the Ippo/Robbo/Ivan camp has done something wrong. I have also stated this opinion many times.

As far as moral infraction, that is another matter. And while I have clear opinions on this I do not post them here.

I think that all parties might be surprised at how I feel about this.

[Roger Brown]

I will not cast doubts on a person because they did not prove their innocence. The burden of proof is upon the accusers.

Personally, as I have stated many times, I do not know whether or not Vas has done something wrong. I also do not know whether or not the Ippo/Robbo/Ivan camp has done something wrong. I have also stated this opinion many times.

As far as moral infraction, that is another matter. And while I have clear opinions on this I do not post them here.

I think that all parties might be surprised at how I feel about this.

Hello Dann,

All parties?

Not me.

You are Dann Corbit and your word was, is and will always be - unless something radical happens - good enough for me.

Later.

[Osipov Jury]

It is fine to say that Ippolit shares Rybka's material imbalance methods because of the evidence presented.

Method is very similar, but realisation in Ippolit and Rybka is very different:

Code: Select all

#define PAWNS &#40;wp<6||bp<6&#41;
void init_material&#40;)
&#123; int bp, wp, bn, wn, bbw, bbb, wbw, wbb, br, wr, bq, wq, bb, wb;
  int wminors, bminors, wmajors, bmajors, wtotal, btotal, wmul, bmul;
  int i, phase, diff, disb, mul, v1, v2, v3;

  for &#40;i = 0; i < 0x80000; i++) &#123;
    bp  = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3*2*2*2*2*3*3*9&#41;) % 9;
    wp  = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3*2*2*2*2*3*3&#41;) % 9;
    bn  = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3*2*2*2*2*3&#41;) % 3;
    wn  = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3*2*2*2*2&#41;) % 3;
    bbw = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3*2*2*2&#41;) % 2;
    bbb = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3*2*2&#41;) % 2;
    wbw = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3*2&#41;) % 2;
    wbb = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3*3&#41;) % 2;
    br  = &#40;i / &#40;2*2*3&#41;) % 3;
    wr  = &#40;i / &#40;2*2&#41;) % 3;
    bq  = &#40;i / 2&#41; % 2;
    wq  = &#40;i & 1&#41;;
    bb  = bbw + bbb;
    wb  = wbw + wbb;
    wminors = wb + wn;
    bminors = bb + bn;
    wmajors = wr + 2 * wq;
    bmajors = br + 2 * bq;
    wtotal = wminors + 2 * wmajors;
    btotal = bminors + 2 * bmajors;
    wmul = bmul = 16;

    if &#40;wp == 0&#41; &#123;
      if &#40;wtotal == 1&#41; wmul = 0;
      else &#123;
        if &#40;wtotal == 2&#41; &#123;
          if &#40;wn == 2&#41; &#123;
            if &#40;btotal == 0 && bp == 1&#41; wmul = 1;
            else wmul = 0;
          &#125;
          else if &#40;wb == 2 && btotal == 1 && bn == btotal&#41; wmul = 8;
          else if &#40;wmajors == 1 && btotal == 1&#41; wmul = 2;
          else if &#40;wminors == 2 && btotal == 1&#41; wmul = 2;
          else if &#40;wmajors == 2 && wminors == 1 && bmajors == 2 && bminors == 0&#41; wmul = 2;
          else if &#40;wtotal - btotal <= 1 && wmajors <= 2&#41; wmul = 2;
        &#125;
        else if &#40;wmajors == 2 && wminors == 1 && bmajors == 2 && bminors == 0&#41; wmul = 2;
        else if &#40;wtotal - btotal <= 1 && wmajors <= 2&#41; wmul = 2;
      &#125;
    &#125;
    else if &#40;wp == 1&#41; &#123;
      if &#40;bminors <= 0&#41; &#123;
        if &#40;br > 0 ) &#123;
          if &#40;wtotal == 1&#41; wmul = 4;
          else if &#40;wtotal == 2 && wn == 2&#41; wmul = 4;
          else if &#40;wtotal - btotal <= -1 && wmajors <= 2&#41; wmul = 8;
        &#125;
      &#125;
      else &#123;
        if &#40;wtotal == 1&#41; wmul = 4;
        else if &#40;wtotal == 2 && wn == 2&#41; wmul = 4;
        else if &#40;wmajors == 1 && wminors == 0 && bminors == 1&#41; wmul = 16;
        else if &#40;wtotal - btotal <= 0 && wmajors <= 2&#41; wmul = 8;
      &#125;
    &#125;

    if &#40;bp == 0&#41; &#123;
      if &#40;btotal == 1&#41; bmul = 0;
      else &#123;
        if &#40;btotal == 2&#41; &#123;
          if &#40;bn == 2&#41; &#123;
            if &#40;wtotal == 0 && wp == 1&#41; bmul = 1;
            else bmul = 0;
          &#125;
          else if &#40;bb == 2 && wtotal == 1 && wn == wtotal&#41; bmul = 8;
          else if &#40;bmajors == 1 && wtotal == 1&#41; bmul = 2;
          else if &#40;bminors == 2 && wtotal == 1&#41; bmul = 2;
          else if &#40;bmajors == 2 && bminors == 1 && wmajors == 2 && wminors == 0&#41; bmul = 2;
          else if &#40;btotal - wtotal <= 1 && bmajors <= 2&#41; bmul = 2;
        &#125;
        else if &#40;bmajors == 2 && bminors == 1 && wmajors == 2 && wminors == 0&#41; bmul = 2;
        else if &#40;btotal - wtotal <= 1 && bmajors <= 2&#41; bmul = 2;
      &#125;
    &#125;
    else if &#40;bp == 1&#41; &#123;
      if &#40;wminors <= 0&#41; &#123;
        if &#40;wr > 0 ) &#123;
          if &#40;btotal == 1&#41; bmul = 4;
          else if &#40;btotal == 2 && bn == 2&#41; bmul = 4;
          else if &#40;btotal - wtotal <= -1 && bmajors <= 2&#41; bmul = 8;
        &#125;
      &#125;
      else &#123;
        if &#40;btotal == 1&#41; bmul = 4;
        else if &#40;btotal == 2 && bn == 2&#41; bmul = 4;
        else if &#40;bmajors == 1 && bminors == 0 && wminors == 1&#41; bmul = 16;
        else if &#40;btotal - wtotal <= 0 && bmajors <= 2&#41; bmul = 8;
      &#125;
    &#125;

    v1 = v2 = v3 = 0;
    v1 += &#40;wb - bb&#41; * 3760 + &#40;wp - bp&#41; * 1220 +
          &#40;wn - bn&#41; * 3590 + &#40;wr - br&#41; * 6200 + &#40;wq - bq&#41; * 11400 +
          &#40;wb / 2 - bb / 2&#41; * 510;
    v2 += &#40;wb - bb&#41; * 3310 + &#40;wbb - bbw&#41; * 10 + &#40;wp - bp&#41; * 1000 +
          &#40;wn - bn&#41; * 3180 + &#40;wr - br&#41; * 5200 + &#40;wq - bq&#41; * 9700 +
          &#40;wb / 2 - bb / 2&#41; * 380;
    v3 += &#40;wb - bb&#41; * 2860 + &#40;wbb - bbw&#41; * 20 + &#40;wp - bp&#41; * 780 +
          &#40;wn - bn&#41; * 2770 + &#40;wr - br&#41; * 4200 + &#40;wq - bq&#41; * 8000 +
          &#40;wb / 2 - bb / 2&#41; * 250;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 0 && bb == 0 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 0 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 60; v2 += 50; v3 += 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 0 && bb == 1 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 0 && bb == 1 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 0 && bb == 1 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 0 && bb == 2 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 0 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 1 && bb == 0 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 1 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 30; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 1 && bb == 2 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 1 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 40; v3 -= 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 0 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 60; v2 -= 50; v3 -= 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 0 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 30; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 1 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 30; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 2 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 30; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 1 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 30; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 1 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 30; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 2 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 60; v2 -= 50; v3 -= 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 0 && wn == 2 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 80; v2 -= 70; v3 -= 60; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 0 && bb == 0 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 1 && bb == 0 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 2 && bb == 0 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 0 && bb == 2 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 0 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 30; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 0 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 40; v3 -= 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 1 && bb == 2 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 1 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 30; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 1 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 40; v3 -= 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 2 && bb == 2 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 2 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 30; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 1 && wn == 2 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 40; v3 -= 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 0 && bb == 0 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 0 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 1 && bb == 1 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 1 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 40; v3 += 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 1 && bb == 2 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 0 && bb == 2 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 0 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 30; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 2 && bn == 0&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 40; v3 += 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 0 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 40; v2 -= 40; v3 -= 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 1 && bb == 0 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 0 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 40; v3 += 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 1 && bb == 1 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 1 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 40; v3 += 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 1 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 60; v2 += 50; v3 += 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 1 && bb == 1 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 2 && bn == 1&#41; &#123; v1 += 20; v2 += 20; v3 += 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 1 && bb == 2 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 20; v2 -= 20; v3 -= 20; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 0 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 80; v2 += 70; v3 += 60; &#125;
    if &#40;wb == 2 && wn == 2 && bb == 1 && bn == 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 40; v2 += 40; v3 += 40; &#125;
    if &#40;wr >= 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 300; v2 -= 200; v3 -= 100; &#125;
    if &#40;br >= 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 300; v2 += 200; v3 += 100; &#125;
    if &#40;wq + wr >= 2&#41; &#123; v1 -= 200; v2 -= 150; v3 -= 100; &#125;
    if &#40;bq + br >= 2&#41; &#123; v1 += 200; v2 += 150; v3 += 100; &#125;
    if &#40;wq + wr >= 3&#41; &#123; v1 -= 200; v2 -= 150; v3 -= 100; &#125;
    if &#40;bq + br >= 3&#41; &#123; v1 += 200; v2 += 150; v3 += 100; &#125;
    v1 -= (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * bn&#41; * 29; v2 -= (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * bn&#41; * 27; v3 -= (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * bn&#41; * 25;
    v1 -= (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wr&#41; * 35; v2 -= (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wr&#41; * 30; v3 -= (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wr&#41; * 25;
    v1 -= (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wq&#41; * 24; v2 -= (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wq&#41; * 20; v3 -= (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wq&#41; * 16;
    v1 += (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wn&#41; * 29; v2 += (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wn&#41; * 27; v3 += (&#40;wp - 5&#41; * wn&#41; * 25;
    v1 += (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * br&#41; * 35; v2 += (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * br&#41; * 30; v3 += (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * br&#41; * 25;
    v1 += (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * bq&#41; * 24; v2 += (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * bq&#41; * 20; v3 += (&#40;bp - 5&#41; * bq&#41; * 16;

    phase = &#40;wq + bq&#41; * 8 + &#40;wr + br&#41; * 3 + wb + bb;
    if &#40;phase > 16&#41; disb = &#40;v2 * &#40;32 - phase&#41; + v3 * &#40;phase - 16&#41;) / 16;
               else disb = &#40;v2 * phase + v1 * &#40;16 - phase&#41;) / 16;
    if &#40;disb > 0&#41; mul = wmul; else mul = bmul;
    diff = &#40;bq - wq&#41; * 10 + &#40;br - wr&#41; * 5 + &#40;bn - wn + bb - wb&#41; * 3 + &#40;bp - wp&#41;;
    MatValue&#91;i&#93; = (__int16&#41;&#40;diff * 1000 + &#40;disb * mul&#41; / 16&#41;;

    MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 128;
    if &#40;wbb==1&&wbw==0&&bbb==0&&bbw==1||wbb==0&&wbw==1&&bbb==1&&bbw==0&#41; &#123;
      if &#40;wn + bn + wr + br + wq + bq == 0 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 57;
      else if &#40;wn + bn + wq + bq == 0 && wr == 1 && br == 1 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 102;
      else if &#40;wn + bn + wr + br == 0 && wq == 1 && bq == 1 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 108;
      else if &#40;wr + br + wq + bq == 0 && wn == 1 && bn == 1 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 108;
      else if &#40;PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 115;
    &#125;
    else &#123;
      if &#40;wn + bn + wb + bb + wr + br + wq + bq == 0 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 192;
      else if &#40;wb + bb + wr + br + wq + bq == 0 && wn == 1 && bn == 1 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 140;
      else if &#40;wn + bn + wr + br + wq + bq == 0 && wb == 1 && bb == 1 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 140;
      else if &#40;wn + bn + wb + bb + wr + br == 0 && wq == 1 && bq == 1 && PAWNS&#41; MatMul&#91;i&#93; = 115;
    &#125;
  &#125;
&#125;

[Steve B]

You were the one convincing other moderators and enforcing the rules. There are proofs of that in moderators forum.

how do you know what posts are in the moderators forum?
Steve