How am I rewriting ANYTHING? I simply stated what happened. Vincent was the first person I recall stating that Rybka == Fruit + a few changes. He was basing his comments on program output, not internal investigation. I rejected the concept with no real supporting info. Not until Zach and Theron started a discussion with me did I begin to suspect that all was not right with Rybka. And every day increased that feeling as more and more and more supporting evidence was discovered.Rolf wrote:Bob, arent you re-writing history if you completely left out that before anyone brought any bit of evidence to your eyes that Ch.Theron already had accused Vas in a horrible insult or destroying accusation by proclaiming, I quote the literal wording by heart, that he would be on the top with his Tiger too, if he hadnt this ethical problem that fdidnt allow him to do it? We have here a bias or prejudice before anyone could have started any investigation to condemn a newcomer with character assassination in the absence of legal justice.bob wrote:
It seems that you [Bob is addressing Miguel] are primarily addressing me, so how about getting a few things straight if you want to use my name or imply something about me...
1. I have NEVER said "guts are good to detect clones." Not one time. "gut feel" might be the thing that causes one to look, as in the similarities reported between early Rybka 1.0 beta versions and Fruit. But that does NOT "detect clones" and I have never said nor written such a thing. An outright lie.
2. I was not "notoriously biased from the get-go." Another OUTRIGHT LIE. You can find early posts by me on this subject dismissing it as very unlikely. Until Zach and Christophe began to show me evidence, until I looked at Fruit, and Strelka, and then the Rybka 1.0 beta binary. After looking at the evidence for quite a while, THEN I became convinced. So can you PLEASE get something right, at least every now and then, if you want to imply things about me?
Two outright lies in one post.
To continue, we didn't discover the Rybka 1.6.1 stuff until the investigation was nearly completed. ..
Apparently there is nothing in the ICGA that would allow to seriously complain about a fellow member in the peer group but still with an ethically sober application of the law without any attempts of lynch justice.. The ICGA isnt officially registered anywhere still now, so that I tend to begin to understand you in what a legally unclear situation that had brought you in.
What could you have done to clarify? There was a clear need to make up a case that then would at least convince the direct competitors of Vas.
What was this "need"? There was no need to make up a case to get chess 4.x banned, there was no need to make up a case to get Belle, or Cray Blitz, or Deep Thought banned. There was no need to make up a case to get Lang's "genius" banned. Nor shredder. So why ONLY for Rybka? That is pure nonsense.
Dann was simply wrong. He did not look into the binary. And based on his comments after the evidence began to flow, he was no longer claiming Rybka was original. He didn't like it, but that didn't make it false.
I see a scenario that you had to invent (I should begin to use the word criminalize) something as out of any tolerable dimensions only to prove a wrong in Vas programming when after the unrefuted statement of Dann Corbit almost all others now and in the past would also be guilty under that same accusation simply because there is almost nothing in a chess program (intended to play tournament chess or at least simulating it) that could be called original and a singularity of some sort besides some freaky name adoptions.
If the majority of ICGA members feel things are "out of control" the ICGA would cease to exist because they would cease renewing their memberships. That has not happened. The conclusion is obvious.
This is looking privately motivated and it lacks just the necessary legality that we expect if we dont want to fall back into lynch justice (NB that this term doesnt only mean burning and hanging etc. it means the lack of control in a fair judicial processing). However the absolute privately construed non-official staff of this ICGA doesnt imply any fair handling in case of complaints.
In the end I ask myself if the ICGA could be taken for serious at all if there is no way to officially pursue any violations of human rights against other members.
That is completely irrelevant. If Reul did not properly and independently develop his thesis, that is an issue for his academic institution. From things recently posted, his thesis was not about evaluation, but rather about some specific search issues (including bitboards). It may well be that his thesis is perfectly acceptable. I have not read it and do not know what was cited and what was not.Ed like always seems to have seen something reveiling in the case of the tournament director himself who is a dutch by chance and the one who cared for the dissertation of Fritz Reul (see also the next events in a continuation of this message...)
