bob wrote:The wheels of justice don't always grind fast, but they grind effectively.
What justice are you talking about? I cant respect a justice that arbitrarily chooses its targets and spare other well protected sinners. I give you a political example. Would you deny that the US military has commited war crimes in Vietnam, Iraq or Afghanistan? Was there smoke in the air? Of course. Now I ask you how come that the US is never judged guilty before the court of the International Tribunal In The Hague?
Or take another example. After Deep Blue 2 team had beaten Kasparov they didnt allow to examine the details but they deconstructed the machine and quickly destroyed the evidence. You never raised your voice in protest. To the contrary you defended the team.
With this in mind I suppose that Vas Rajlich isnt accepting any justice performed by hobby judges.
Our justice system is very complex for a single reason and that is to guarantee fairness towards every possible defendent without prejudice. But what you were doing all these months is fabricating something that could be used to justify a pre-conceived judgement. In short you had no legal court trial at all. In other words, in every normal courtroom your results couldnt be used because of your bias. You are no independent and neutral researcher. With you I'm talking about you and your allies.
In special in the USA and its legal system it's so important to care about any possible bias, if not you have no case.
Let me give you a final example. The OJ trial. Of course OJ had murdered his wife and her lover. But OJ still got no murder verdict. Why? Because it could be reveiled that a single policeman had lied in a question that had practically nothing to do with that murder case. He had denied of "ever" having used the PC word "negroe" which is forbidden in your country. But he has used it. And so OJ couldnt be condemned for murder.
Bear this example in mind when you believe that your proof of Vasiks wrongdoing would hold water in a true lawcase. You have made hundreds of such "negroe" remarks against Vas and his lack of this or that so that you are totally burned as an expert witness. And you are not the only one who showed his bias. Christophe Theron comes to mind as a member of the panel.
The US military has killed a huge number of innocent people and still nobody is attending a trial in The Hague. Take this and bear it in mind if you want to destroy the life of someone out of sports like Vas. Somehow we must keep things in a fair balance and we shouldnt enter into blood thirst mode in a hobby entertainement, if true murder isnt effectively prosecuted. See OJ and the US military war crimes in the past wars.
Vasik's most faithful dog is back
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
bob wrote:
Arbitrarily chooses? A formal protest was filed by a large group of participants at the WCCC events. The ICGA _had_ to investigate such a protest. And doing so is not an "arbitrary choice" it is mandated by tournament rules...
Just a minor quibble ... I don't believe it is mandatory to conduct retroactive investigations indefinitely far past. In 2040 if they want to question the results of a 1997 tournament, well it may just be tough luck. How long is reasonable is a judgement call, and up to the ICGA. Clearly any challenge within a year should be investigated. Going back 6 years might be reasonably be considered excessive by some (and reasonably be considered appropriate by others). Normally I would personally consider it excessive to go that far back, but if I received a petition of noteworthy members of the community as was the case here I might change my mind.
USC just had their 2004 NCAA football national championship vacated. 7 years after the fact. It is not common for a chess protest to take so long, but in this case it happened... The ICGA could impose a statute of limitations, should the programmers/members want to do so.
-Sam
Rolf wrote:Bob: "Nothing in our evidence that even remotely suggests guilt. It was all made up. A panel of distinguished computer chess programmers fabricated the whole thing."
Rolf:
"no, that is twisting my words. of course you found results, only and strong counterargument I'm saying is that you have no authorization to act like expert, accuser and judge, and that is the basic minimum of our justice. The guys who lynched in the past century, werent wrong on the guilt of certain people, but still their lynching was wrong because they didnt follow legal courtroom rules. Same with you and your allies now. The only possible solution is a legal court case but not the kangooroo stuff of the ICGA. It's so trivial that I cant understand why you want something even you as our greatest expert cant get. Because if you could, then we had no justice at all."
I, and the rest of the panel, collected and presented the evidence. The judge was David and the ICGA board. We were not a part of the process once we submitted our report.
We don't _have_ to follow normal courtroom rules, by the way. The ICGA is a private organization that can deal with internal issues in any way it chooses. It just so happens the way it was dealt with was the same as it has used in the past. And it is fair. And supported by the membership.
