Its not bully, its abandoning. I won't provide a version to testers who don't meet some standard I define for myself. Obviously no individual has the power to compel a group to do something. The point of the post was that as a collective, we do have that power. And if we reach a consensus that stolen engines should not be rated, then that can be reflected in the rating lists.hgm wrote: ↑Sun Feb 21, 2021 11:16 pm The idea that a few unhappy people can bully rating organizations into supporting their (sometimes extreme) views is really funny. 'Boycotting CCRL', (just to name an example), how would you do that? What does it even mean if you vow to 'ignore it' yourself? Would you make a fool of yourself by claiming a strength for your engine that most others would see to be completely off? How would anyone care if you didn't look at a certain rating list? And in particular, why would those who create such lists care? It is not like you pay them a fee per look. You can be sure that any noob who bumped into a chess engine and wants to know its rating is directed by Google to CCRL...
CCRL is the gold standard, not because they are doing anything right, but because there was a collective idea that CCRL had the best data to offer. That can easily change. XYZ can become that new standard. Maybe they do it by meeting the things I would like to see. Maybe they do it by providing greater games, longer time controls, better hardware, better data discovery, etc.
You see this as some war against an individual entity, or set of them; but really its a very basic statement: Don't support people or groups that do not support you.