A Very Novel Idea Concerning Vas- BE FAIR

[geots]

When you have someone's character in question to the point it can affect the man's living, be fair at least. I would propose a statute of limitations on how long he can be drug thru the court of public opinion. No matter your side in this, surely one would think, yea or nay- at least give him the same rights you would a common criminal. The manner in which this is being handled bothers me greatly.

I see you deleted your reply to my post, so I'll requote it:

Not hard to see you have only made 60 posts here with that horseshit answer. Take a break and come back when you grow up

Okay, mister, I'll spell it out to you in detail:

I don't live here on this forum, and I don't make meaningless posts. When I post, I have something of interest to say. Calling somebody names and telling them to grow up, as you did, isn't considered something of interest.

Since you missed the sarcasm, I'll make it plain to you.

No, I don't believe Mr. Rajlich should get a single bit of slack from anybody outside of his shills, butt-kissers, and those too clueless to know what's going on.

Give me one good reason why anybody should give this person any respect?

He used Fruit open-source code. More people who are qualified to know that have stated that's likely than have stated is isn't true.. Then he made it closed-source and turned it into a commercial enterprise. That's not debatable. Making GPL code closed-source is, to my understanding, a violation of GPL license. Charging money for software based on GPL code is, to my understanding, a violation of GPL license.

Then the man had the balls to annex Strelka because it was a clone of his and has the balls to condemn the Ippolit and/or Houdini as being clones of his. The pot calling the kettle black. And he further, in my opinion and probably that of others, coerces various online chess sites and chess tournament organizers to ban said alleged clones from competition.

In other words, the man who stole Fruit's code and turned it into a business, called somebody else who did the same to him (Strelka), got people who allegedly did the same banned through coercion of various sites and organizations, is looking for respect?

Yeah, right. Respect is earned, not demanded or asked for.

This cheap ploy of yours to divert the situation for somebody who was busted long ago in the eyes of the chess programming world, and who may soon be busted by the FSF and/or Mr. Letouzey, reminds me of Richard Nixon, in the middle of Watergate, telling the people of the United States that it should put Watergate aside and get back to the business of running the nation. That was lame then, and this is lame now.

Is that plain and grown up enough for you, Mr. Speight?

PS: Mr. Rajlich's character isn't in question at all. I believe that most of us who aren't Vas-kissers have a pretty good read on his character.

When you come at me, you better bring more than you've got now. A triple digit IQ would be a good asset for you

[geots]

So Graham lies and wishes for the death of others. Horseshit

Horseshit?

He said kinda "I hope they crash into a tree and disapear"

That's going too far for my taste.

Maybe i will sic Graham on this Barrister nut.

[geots]

When you have someone's character in question to the point it can affect the man's living, be fair at least. I would propose a statute of limitations on how long he can be drug thru the court of public opinion. No matter your side in this, surely one would think, yea or nay- at least give him the same rights you would a common criminal. The manner in which this is being handled bothers me greatly.

I see you deleted your reply to my post, so I'll requote it:

Not hard to see you have only made 60 posts here with that horseshit answer. Take a break and come back when you grow up

Okay, mister, I'll spell it out to you in detail:

I don't live here on this forum, and I don't make meaningless posts. When I post, I have something of interest to say. Calling somebody names and telling them to grow up, as you did, isn't considered something of interest.

Since you missed the sarcasm, I'll make it plain to you.

No, I don't believe Mr. Rajlich should get a single bit of slack from anybody outside of his shills, butt-kissers, and those too clueless to know what's going on.

Give me one good reason why anybody should give this person any respect?

He used Fruit open-source code. More people who are qualified to know that have stated that's likely than have stated is isn't true.. Then he made it closed-source and turned it into a commercial enterprise. That's not debatable. Making GPL code closed-source is, to my understanding, a violation of GPL license. Charging money for software based on GPL code is, to my understanding, a violation of GPL license.

Then the man had the balls to annex Strelka because it was a clone of his and has the balls to condemn the Ippolit and/or Houdini as being clones of his. The pot calling the kettle black. And he further, in my opinion and probably that of others, coerces various online chess sites and chess tournament organizers to ban said alleged clones from competition.

In other words, the man who stole Fruit's code and turned it into a business, called somebody else who did the same to him (Strelka), got people who allegedly did the same banned through coercion of various sites and organizations, is looking for respect?

Yeah, right. Respect is earned, not demanded or asked for.

This cheap ploy of yours to divert the situation for somebody who was busted long ago in the eyes of the chess programming world, and who may soon be busted by the FSF and/or Mr. Letouzey, reminds me of Richard Nixon, in the middle of Watergate, telling the people of the United States that it should put Watergate aside and get back to the business of running the nation. That was lame then, and this is lame now.

Is that plain and grown up enough for you, Mr. Speight?

PS: Mr. Rajlich's character isn't in question at all. I believe that most of us who aren't Vas-kissers have a pretty good read on his character.

The forum is moderated by Bob and
roger. I dont know this third one But the 2 i know are very good. Out of respect for them i wont eat you alive. But we could carry this to another forum. I wont bite unless i get the chance

[geots]

My apologies Fern. I didnt realize you were the other monitor. My apologies

[Damir]

Hi George,

May I give you a small friendly advice. Never drink too much when you post here, cause I don't understand a word you write or say.
Try and do it in a sober manner, and not when you are drunk, cause you are making a fool out of yourself....

[geots]

Hi George,

May I give you a small friendly advice. Never drink too much when you post here, cause I don't understand a word you write or say.
Try and do it in a sober manner, and not when you are drunk, cause you are making a fool out of yourself....

[Laskos]

Who is this "George Speight"? A basement tester or something more I am unaware of? I am amazed how such personages as him or G.Banks can be so impertinent, vocal, distasteful and clueless about anything.

Do you "George Speight" have a college degree? Could you show your GPA (if such does exist)?

Kai

[geots]

Who is this "George Speight"? A basement tester or something more I am unaware of? I am amazed how such personages as him or G.Banks can be so impertinent, vocal, distasteful and clueless about anything.

Do you "George Speight" have a college degree? Could you show your GPA (if such does exist)?

Kai

You get to see nothing- you should be used to that

[Tom Barrister]

The forum is moderated by Bob and
roger. I dont know this third one But the 2 i know are very good. Out of respect for them i wont eat you alive. But we could carry this to another forum. I wont bite unless i get the chance

All I see is one sad man quoting the same post five times to make five comments. Now anybody with clue would only quote once, instead of driving up his post count and wasting a lot of forum space and bandwidth. To do so would require a clue, though, so it apparently lets you out.

I do believe you could eat me alive, though. You certainly have a big enough mouth for the job. It would be nice if something besides grade-school trash talk came out of that mouth once in a while, but that's too much to expect.

-----
Moving on ....

I'm not an attorney. Tom Barrister was the main character of my first published short story. I adopted the name for my internet persona.

I'm also not a programmer. Because of this, I may use the wrong term from time to time. Most people can figure out what I mean. The Anal Police will pick at terms.

Now as I understand it, these are two of the rules of the GPL:

1) Source code that falls under the GPL can't be used in a closed-source project if such project is made available to the public (either free or commercial), unless the author offers in writing to release said source code to the public.

2) Source code that falls under the GPL cannot be used in any commercial project, unless the author offers in writing to release said source-code to the public.

As I understand it, this is the way things are or were:

1) Fruit falls under the GPL, meaning it's covered by GPL protection and under the jurisdiction, I assume, of the Free Software Foundation.

2) Rybka is closed-source and currently commercial.

3) Mr. Rajlich has never made the source of any of the commercial versions of Rybka available to the public.

If Rybka used or was derived from Fruit source code, that would mean that Mr. Rajlich is in violation of the GPL. That would put the matter of legal action in the hands of the Free Software Foundation, since Mr. Letouzey apparently released Fruit to the FSF. Using Fruit source code in some way that violates the GPL would seem to make Mr. Rajlich dishonest.

Now let's move on to whether Rybka is in some way a derivative of Fruit.

Mr. Rajlich claimed that Strelka was a clone of Rybka.

It was determined that Strelka is very closely based upon Fruit.

If those two statements are true, then that version of Rybka must be very closely based on Fruit as well. I suppose that it's possible in 1 out of 1000 instances that this might not be true, but that's well beyond the realm of "reaosnable doubt".

Therefore at least one version of commercial Rybka is closely based on Fruit.

That's a violation of the GPL.

That makes Mr. Rajlich dishonest.

Now that this is established, let's examine the Strelka situation further. Mr. Rajlich loudly condemned Strelka for being a clone, direct copy, or whatever of Rybka (to quote the forum: "It is a direct Reverse Engineer of Rybka"). Mr. Rajlich did the same essential thing with Rybka, regarding Fruit.

That makes Mr. Rajlich a hypocrite (pot calling kettle black, etc.).

Mr. Rajlich has categorically denied that Rybka is based on Fruit.

That makes Mr. Rajlich a liar.

Now let's take a look at the Rybka forum. Discussion about any of what they consider the illegal clones of Rybka is forbidden. Much other content is censored. In fact, that's one of the most heavily censored (call it "moderated" if you wish) forums I know of. The end result is that the only views that exist there are those that the moderation team approves of.

In fact, the main discussion about Fruit I can find states that Strelka is direct reverse-engineered Rybka fraud. The same post goes on to say that whether Strelka contains Fruit doesn't matter? Hello? Rybka isn't based on Fruit, Strelka is Rybka, and it doesn't matter if Strelka contains Fruit source? When challenged about that, some double-talk was issued, then when challenged again, no answer was forthcoming. I'm surprised that Felix didn't accidentally delete that thread, too, when trying to merge it with another. I believe that a deleted thread needs to be confirmed on the forum software they use, and that it's still retrievable anyway, but I'll let that pass.

How stupid do these people think we are?

Mr. Rajlich claims that he lost all of the source code of Rybka 3. I doubt many people believe that one.

It's been said that Mr. Rajlich is to some degree responsible for the alleged illegal Rybka clones/derivatives (i.e. the Ippolit series and their offspring) not being allowed on some websites nor allowed into tournaments/matches held on some of the computer rating list websites.

Now we're being asked be Mr. Speight to give Mr. Rajlich some respect.

I don't know how they do things on his playground, but in the adult world, not a lot of people are going to respect a hypocritical, lying thief who makes lame attempts to cover up his dishonesty.

I have no stake in this feud. As I said, I'm not a programmer, and I'm not an attorney, although I have a decent working knowledge of some types of law.

What I do know about is human nature. If nothing else, make it this: If the best ploy somebody under fire for wrongdoing (Mr. Rajlich) has is to send attack-Beagles to bark at others, call them names, and point fingers that say "You're naughty, too", as though that makes their own misdoings okay, then it's near certain, at least in my book, that they're guilty as charged.

The problem is that I haven't done anything wrong, except perhaps be a bit to direct in expressing my beliefs. To date, I haven't seen any evidence to dispute those beliefs, and I've seen plenty to back them up.

[geots]

The forum is moderated by Bob and
roger. I dont know this third one But the 2 i know are very good. Out of respect for them i wont eat you alive. But we could carry this to another forum. I wont bite unless i get the chance

All I see is one sad man quoting the same post five times to make five comments. Now anybody with clue would only quote once, instead of driving up his post count and wasting a lot of forum space and bandwidth. To do so would require a clue, though, so it apparently lets you out.

I do believe you could eat me alive, though. You certainly have a big enough mouth for the job. It would be nice if something besides grade-school trash talk came out of that mouth once in a while, but that's too much to expect.

-----
Moving on ....

I'm not an attorney. Tom Barrister was the main character of my first published short story. I adopted the name for my internet persona.

I'm also not a programmer. Because of this, I may use the wrong term from time to time. Most people can figure out what I mean. The Anal Police will pick at terms.

Now as I understand it, these are two of the rules of the GPL:

1) Source code that falls under the GPL can't be used in a closed-source project if such project is made available to the public (either free or commercial), unless the author offers in writing to release said source code to the public.

2) Source code that falls under the GPL cannot be used in any commercial project, unless the author offers in writing to release said source-code to the public.

As I understand it, this is the way things are or were:

1) Fruit falls under the GPL, meaning it's covered by GPL protection and under the jurisdiction, I assume, of the Free Software Foundation.

2) Rybka is closed-source and currently commercial.

3) Mr. Rajlich has never made the source of any of the commercial versions of Rybka available to the public.

If Rybka used or was derived from Fruit source code, that would mean that Mr. Rajlich is in violation of the GPL. That would put the matter of legal action in the hands of the Free Software Foundation, since Mr. Letouzey apparently released Fruit to the FSF. Using Fruit source code in some way that violates the GPL would seem to make Mr. Rajlich dishonest.

Now let's move on to whether Rybka is in some way a derivative of Fruit.

Mr. Rajlich claimed that Strelka was a clone of Rybka.

It was determined that Strelka is very closely based upon Fruit.

If those two statements are true, then that version of Rybka must be very closely based on Fruit as well. I suppose that it's possible in 1 out of 1000 instances that this might not be true, but that's well beyond the realm of "reaosnable doubt".

Therefore at least one version of commercial Rybka is closely based on Fruit.

That's a violation of the GPL.

That makes Mr. Rajlich dishonest.

Now that this is established, let's examine the Strelka situation further. Mr. Rajlich loudly condemned Strelka for being a clone, direct copy, or whatever of Rybka (to quote the forum: "It is a direct Reverse Engineer of Rybka"). Mr. Rajlich did the same essential thing with Rybka, regarding Fruit.

That makes Mr. Rajlich a hypocrite (pot calling kettle black, etc.).

Mr. Rajlich has categorically denied that Rybka is based on Fruit.

That makes Mr. Rajlich a liar.

Now let's take a look at the Rybka forum. Discussion about any of what they consider the illegal clones of Rybka is forbidden. Much other content is censored. In fact, that's one of the most heavily censored (call it "moderated" if you wish) forums I know of. The end result is that the only views that exist there are those that the moderation team approves of.

In fact, the main discussion about Fruit I can find states that Strelka is direct reverse-engineered Rybka fraud. The same post goes on to say that whether Strelka contains Fruit doesn't matter? Hello? Rybka isn't based on Fruit, Strelka is Rybka, and it doesn't matter if Strelka contains Fruit source? When challenged about that, some double-talk was issued, then when challenged again, no answer was forthcoming. I'm surprised that Felix didn't accidentally delete that thread, too, when trying to merge it with another. I believe that a deleted thread needs to be confirmed on the forum software they use, and that it's still retrievable anyway, but I'll let that pass.

How stupid do these people think we are?

Mr. Rajlich claims that he lost all of the source code of Rybka 3. I doubt many people believe that one.

It's been said that Mr. Rajlich is to some degree responsible for the alleged illegal Rybka clones/derivatives (i.e. the Ippolit series and their offspring) not being allowed on some websites nor allowed into tournaments/matches held on some of the computer rating list websites.

Now we're being asked be Mr. Speight to give Mr. Rajlich some respect.

I don't know how they do things on his playground, but in the adult world, not a lot of people are going to respect a hypocritical, lying thief who makes lame attempts to cover up his dishonesty.

I have no stake in this feud. As I said, I'm not a programmer, and I'm not an attorney, although I have a decent working knowledge of some types of law.

What I do know about is human nature. If nothing else, make it this: If the best ploy somebody under fire for wrongdoing (Mr. Rajlich) has is to send attack-Beagles to bark at others, call them names, and point fingers that say "You're naughty, too", as though that makes their own misdoings okay, then it's near certain, at least in my book, that they're guilty as charged.

The problem is that I haven't done anything wrong, except perhaps be a bit to direct in expressing my beliefs. To date, I haven't seen any evidence to dispute those beliefs, and I've seen plenty to back them up.