Requirements to be tested (suggestions)

[Matthias Gemuh]

Well, if I were a CCRL member, I would _never_ test Houdini, no matter what the legal status of it turned out to be. Simply for the reason that most Houdini users present themselves here as a bunch of indecent, demanding bullies, that think they have the right to tell others what to do, and insult or accuse them of whatever they please when they don't get their way. I would never want to have anything to do with such riphraph, or with the engine they support!

CCRL is a great service to us, 'small engine' authors. I hope it will always stay that, and that they will resist pressure to waste valuable testing time to please people that do not deserve it. (And are not generally useful by any standard, as they did not author any engine at all, not even a 'small' one, their only 'accomplishment' in life apparently telling others what they want done...)

Some of these Houdini users even use Winboard for tournaments including Houdini.

[De Vos W]

Well, if I were a CCRL member, I would _never_ test Houdini, no matter what the legal status of it turned out to be. Simply for the reason that most Houdini users present themselves here as a bunch of indecent, demanding bullies, that think they have the right to tell others what to do, and insult or accuse them of whatever they please when they don't get their way. I would never want to have anything to do with such riphraph, or with the engine they support!

CCRL is a great service to us, 'small engine' authors. I hope it will always stay that, and that they will resist pressure to waste valuable testing time to please people that do not deserve it. (And are not generally useful by any standard, as they did not author any engine at all, not even a 'small' one, their only 'accomplishment' in life apparently telling others what they want done...)

by Jeremy Bernstein:
When all else fails, blame the users. Thanks for the laugh, H.G. Muller:

http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1051

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

by Jeremy Bernstein:
When all else fails, blame the users. Thanks for the laugh, H.G. Muller:

http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1051

You must like him a lot, as you're doing all you can to prove his point.

[De Vos W]

by Jeremy Bernstein:
When all else fails, blame the users. Thanks for the laugh, H.G. Muller:

http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1051

You must like him a lot, as you're doing all you can to prove his point.

He is right!

[Matthias Gemuh]

Well, if I were a CCRL member, I would _never_ test Houdini, no matter what the legal status of it turned out to be. Simply for the reason that most Houdini users present themselves here as a bunch of indecent, demanding bullies, that think they have the right to tell others what to do, and insult or accuse them of whatever they please when they don't get their way. I would never want to have anything to do with such riphraph, or with the engine they support!

CCRL is a great service to us, 'small engine' authors. I hope it will always stay that, and that they will resist pressure to waste valuable testing time to please people that do not deserve it. (And are not generally useful by any standard, as they did not author any engine at all, not even a 'small' one, their only 'accomplishment' in life apparently telling others what they want done...)

Some of these Houdini users even use Winboard for tournaments including Houdini.

Sorry, I forgot these :

[hgm]

Yeah, I agree that that could definitely be considered a mitigating circumstance. Let's just hope WinBoard doesn't get a bad name because of this. Btw, it is not people that actually do testing that is the worst crowd. I guess they are too busy to misbehave. It s the people that incessantly whine about others having to test it for them...

[De Vos W]

Yeah, I agree that that could definitely be considered a mitigating circumstance. Let's just hope WinBoard doesn't get a bad name because of this. Btw, it is not people that actually do testing that is the worst crowd. I guess they are too busy to misbehave. It s the people that incessantly whine about others having to test it for them...

Said the creature who made posts like this:

H.G.Muller wrote:

That is quite incredible, and certainly not how it works in real life. In no civilized country in the World one can spread damaging

accusations, and put the burdon on the accused to prove that they are false. If someone would call him a "stinking child molester",

would that posting stand until he could provide convincing proof on the way he smells? How would you or the membership acquire such

proof, in your opinion?


H.G.Muller

Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 7883
Location: Amsterdam
Posted: Tue Dec 28, 2010 6:34 pm Post subject: Re: Houdini 1.5 Strength Question

IMO he could actually be _jailed_ for what he posts, if the addressed persons would pursue it. Not because of what I think, but because of what the law says. If it were upto me, he would have found himself on the Chair long ago...
I would have thought that the charter of this place is secondary to common law and decency.
Note that my main gripe is not even with what he posts; if the moderators endorese criminalactivity here, it is their problem. The main point is that he does it of topic. The mere mention of the word 'Houdini' or 'Rybka' should not be allowed to be used as an excuse for launching the same libelous attacks that he has posted already a hundred times before in other threads. Skip them? When the addressed are supposed to deny the accusations, and are considered to admit them (and worse) if they don't take the criminals to court? Which then attracks all kinds of other scum? Now that is a joke!
Even if the contents of his posts would have been benign such spamming should not be tolerated.

He incessently accuses people of corruption and bribery, which IMO, is far worse than calling them an asshole. If you call someone an asshole, it is nderstood that this is just a figure of speech. Which is not true for the viscious accusatons he makes against CCRL members.
I am not joking when I say that most his post are criminal offences punishble by law. I have seen it happen in other forums several times, where someone made similar accusations aganst a less tolerant individual(which I will not name now), and after a week very meekly posted an apology retracting everything they had said, underpressure of his lawyer. To the point where on the chessvariants forum it is now official moderator policy to scrutinously remove every reference to that person or his activities. Because also the owner of a website can be sued when they allow libel to be published, and this particular owner was not looking forward to criminal litigation.
Libel is a criminal offence. Those spreading it are criminals. That is what the law says.
__________________________________________________________________________________