Thoughts...

[Milos]

For me you with your unknown name are more responsible for a climate here.

Lucky for you that you have a very known and sound name. But I think you have misspelled it. It should have been Rofl.

[Rolf]

For me you with your unknown name are more responsible for a climate here.

Lucky for you that you have a very known and sound name. But I think you have misspelled it. It should have been Rofl.

Ahem. That will last on me now for ages. I see similarities between you and Vas. He isnt stupid, following you. You are not stupid, following me. So, ahem, Me cant be stupid too.

[Rolf]

My post is not a personal attack, just pointing out the truth for all to see.

I presume the reasons for joining the CCC are not personal and they should be explained in detail be the new member? I didn't see a similar article in the charter.

Or you take on yourself the role of the one who knows the general truth and you are here be the will of the almighty to show this (yours and in the same time universal) truth to everyone?

The truth has yet to be established in my opinion (and my opinion is no more or less valuable than anybody elses, no matter what you wish to infer).

Cheers,
Graham.

Your opinion is a lot less valuable than that of Professor Hyatt and Zach Wegner for obvious reasons and in those circumstances it is disrespectful to claim otherwise.

I dont want to sound disrespectful or impolite or impostering, Keith, but the above almost forced me to finally give you an explanation for what I also said on CTF.

It's a real calamity of your mind frame if you wrongly follow such a nonsense like

- if several parties join in a common opinion then this opinion is higher valued than the one of a singular person, they must be correct while the single must be wrong or

- if we have two different opinions, mostly opposing each other, from two different people, and one person is an expert in the field of the debate, then the opinion of the "higher" expert is always higher valued than the opinion of the lower rated expert or if even only layman; his opinion is more correct than the opinion of the lower person

both these concludings are false and without justification. The main reason for such a wrong thought process comes if a mal educated person assumes without any reason that in opinions it's only a question of expertise in a singular field. But this is wrong. An expert has advantages if we speak of plain knowledge. Here the probability is higher that the higher expert is better informed, has more experience, and therefore a better insight into the topic in question.

But just for opinions where you cant establish a judgement on knowledge, where other fields come into play, say like justice, an expert for computerchess is not automatically the one with a better opinion.

For me it's absolutely clear that in opinions where an overall experience in life is necessary Graham normally should "outplay" or "top" the 21 y. old Zach, a young student.

Above all that it's a real provokation for my own mind if I must see that an expert like Ryan who knows the history of the different Fruit versions and owns the code of version 2.3., isnt interesting enough to be contacted. And you are trying to justify it, because Ryan should know only something of Strelka. Keith, on what a base you are doing this? Is there a basis at all? What if the question of Strelka isnt important at all? If Ryan could testify something about Fruit and public domain?

[Graham Banks]

For me it's absolutely clear that in opinions where an overall experience in life is necessary Graham normally should "outplay" or "top" the 21 y. old Zach, a young student.

Sorry Rolf, but Zach has programming skills whereas I don't. All I have is some inside knowledge.
Although I don't necessarily agree with Zach's opinion at this stage, as far as I'm concerned, we wouldn't have this hobby without programmers like him. They have my respect in this regard.

Cheers,
Graham.

[Rolf]

Is this here a question of programming skills? If you insist on your advice to consult Ryan?

[Graham Banks]

Is this here a question of programming skills? If you insist on your advice to consult Ryan?

They would find it interesting and useful to chat in private with Ryan about the issue for sure.

Cheers,
Graham.

[bob]

Professor Hyatt has already given one perfectly adequate reason why he sees no need to contact Mr Benitez and there may be others as well.

While I respect Bob's expertise, I would still suggest contacting Ryan in private to discuss the issue as being useful.

To what end? I (and several others) are quite capable of comparing programs. If Ryan sees no similarities, he is simply not looking very carefully. I don't need to ask anyone to interpret what I have seen, anybody that _wants_ to do this comparison can do it quite reliably, just as they could find copied paragraphs from one book used in another, once it has been pointed out.

[Rolf]

Professor Hyatt has already given one perfectly adequate reason why he sees no need to contact Mr Benitez and there may be others as well.

While I respect Bob's expertise, I would still suggest contacting Ryan in private to discuss the issue as being useful.

To what end? I (and several others) are quite capable of comparing programs. If Ryan sees no similarities, he is simply not looking very carefully. I don't need to ask anyone to interpret what I have seen, anybody that _wants_ to do this comparison can do it quite reliably, just as they could find copied paragraphs from one book used in another, once it has been pointed out.

Could you please describe what exact versions of what two progs you have compared? I think there could be the reason for such talks. Vas had said that Rybka contained 100% original code plus public domain. Even I can imagine what this means. Vas isnt stupid.

[Graham Banks]

Professor Hyatt has already given one perfectly adequate reason why he sees no need to contact Mr Benitez and there may be others as well.

While I respect Bob's expertise, I would still suggest contacting Ryan in private to discuss the issue as being useful.

To what end? I (and several others) are quite capable of comparing programs. If Ryan sees no similarities, he is simply not looking very carefully. I don't need to ask anyone to interpret what I have seen, anybody that _wants_ to do this comparison can do it quite reliably, just as they could find copied paragraphs from one book used in another, once it has been pointed out.

Could you please describe what exact versions of what two progs you have compared? I think there could be the reason for such talks. Vas had said that Rybka contained 100% original code plus public domain. Even I can imagine what this means. Vas isnt stupid.

I think we should just let things rest now Rolf. Things are just going round in circles and posters seem to have decided what they want to believe one way or the other. It's really up to Vas to say more in my opinion, otherwise nothing changes.

Cheers,
Graham.

[Rolf]

I think we should just let things rest now Rolf. Things are just going round in circles and posters seem to have decided what they want to believe one way or the other. It's really up to Vas to say more in my opinion, otherwise nothing changes.

Cheers,
Graham.

At least you know what I meant?