Questions for the FG about the organization of the election

[martinn]

What a nonsense.

From the charter - Please note that unsubstantiated cloning or copying or plagiarising accusations are considered insult / libel, and that substantiated accusations are allowed only in the Engine Origins section.

The key word here is : unsubstantiated

And it became fully documented - https://rebel7775.wixsite.com/rebel/simex

And its conclusion -

Meaning there is a 15-20% increase of move similarity and thus a decrease of 15-20% in originality in one year.

We asked for an explanation but satisfying answers did not came.

I still stand by that.

---

And let's not forget of what you said yourself.

I think you may be misinterpreting my commentary, or perhaps I am not clear enough.

Just because I agree with the notion that a significant portion of the "new crop" of engines are unoriginal, uninteresting, uninspired, and unworthy, does not mean that I ASSERT that this simex proves my beliefs. Simex might suggest we're onto something. MAYBE. Still OPINION......... But to say it proves anything is lunacy.

I tend not to go on my full rants about engine originality in public, as my opinion ( just as yours' ) is a highly negative one that only makes people upset. Posting my messages won't do anything to change our argument, since we already agree on some form of the hypothesis.

It was so well documented that you had to deliberately modify the results of your own engine to pass your own tests so you could falsely accuse others ...

(BTW your deliberately modified results are still on that website "with your well documented proof")

[hgm]

not going through (reading) this ridiculous thread (had a
look for some two seconds and then had enough)
Apparently the well respected Ed (hopefully remaining as moderator is endorsing
such discussion but if i would be moderator (*) i would simply close/lock this
imo pointless- discussion. some democracy, fine with me, but not anarchy
(*) 300k / yr would be ok, maybe, negotiable

so good grief, what it's all about in the first place, wondering
who would have the guts to become moderator after hgm
(or CW) ? just wondering. except for some discord kiddies
maybe but they won't get enough vote i think, cv or not

So the youth gangs think it's not a place for old men anymore ?
(just wondering)

This post initially called us "psychopathic kiddies". Somehow there is 0 consequences for this. Meanwhile someone else gets a week ban for "Old men never learn their lesson.". Why is there such a bias, is the dementia already starting to kick in or is it something more sinister?

Nothing sinister at all. It is just the consequence of having different moderators without a uniform moderation policy. And of course a necessary condition for acting is that you should actually have seen the offence. Which for me usually means the posting should have been reported, unless I happened to accidentally read it. The alledged violation you are complaining about here appears to have disappeared without a trace, so there isn't any reason to act. If it would have been removed by moderation, I would have expected some remark about this; I would have substituted it by something like "[Moderation: please refrain from group insults]" in red text.

Postings that only serve to insult I simply delete; if there are multiple of those I add a posting which orders to stop this, and lock the thread if there was not any ongoing genuine discussion in it.

[hgm]

You/They banned me for a joke lol.

So what? You thinks jokes cannot be insults?

Your simex threads are in greater violation of the/your rules than my comment.

3. Do not contain personal and/or libelous attacks on others
6. Are not bullying, or vicarious bullying

You, without any due diligence, accused a handful of up-and-coming engine authors of cloning each other engines -- specifically accusing them of sharing the same neural nets, a claim which is disproved just by opening the engine's github pages and noting the wildly different sizes and architectures. At the very least, you are a bully towards the young kids. Although libelous is on the table too. Thankfully the discord communities are present, and so support was rallied behind those defamed.

As pointed out, bringing up evidence for cloning is allowed in the Engine Origins section. If unsound, it can be debunked by the accused or other members. It seems to be useful to have a place for conducting such discussions.

So I'm not sure you even pass your own purity test, Ed.

I don't think Ed wants to run, so what is the point?

[hgm]

No. I meant that it seems that of those eligible to stand, you're going to accept only those you deem acceptable.
Some. like myself, have already been told that perhaps we shouldn't bother applying.

Who told you that?

[Graham Banks]

No. I meant that it seems that of those eligible to stand, you're going to accept only those you deem acceptable.
Some. like myself, have already been told that perhaps we shouldn't bother applying.

Who told you that?

"Yesterday you were complaining mountains molehills, today you do more mountain, whilst advocating something so clearly against the EU law that we’ld possibly get fined for it. If you can’t make sense of the arguments in this thread you probably should not be commenting and probably also disqualify yourself from mod status on grounds of advocating unlawfulness when should know better."
viewtopic.php?p=971798#p971798

[Rebel]

It was so well documented that you had to deliberately modify the results of your own engine to pass your own tests so you could falsely accuse others ...

(BTW your deliberately modified results are still on that website "with your well documented proof")

DO NOT CALL ME A LIAR, understood!

In the thread have said I made a mistake and corrected it.

And yes on the website it isn't done yet, thanks for pointing out.

[hgm]

No. I meant that it seems that of those eligible to stand, you're going to accept only those you deem acceptable.
Some. like myself, have already been told that perhaps we shouldn't bother applying.

Who told you that?

"Yesterday you were complaining mountains molehills, today you do more mountain, whilst advocating something so clearly against the EU law that we’ld possibly get fined for it. If you can’t make sense of the arguments in this thread you probably should not be commenting and probably also disqualify yourself from mod status on grounds of advocating unlawfulness when should know better."
viewtopic.php?p=971798#p971798

OK, I see. But "you should disqualify yourself" here IMO does not mean your candidacy would be unacceptably to the FG. Then it would have said "this disqualifies you for mod status".

[towforce]

An issue of concern about the new moderation structure which the FG might like to comment on.

To make it clear that is is a scenario completely unrelated to anyone, or any events, here, imagine a forum called "Cupcakes": they have a founders group (FG), and a single moderator, who is elected.

Now suppose that one of the Cupcakes FG is a bit neurotic, and hence tends to overreact to things. The other members of the Cupcakes FG tolerate him, and are obliged to defend him, even when he's obviously wrong, for the sake of maintaining the appearance of team unity.

The members of Cupcakes vote for a wholesome and intelligent moderator who is rock-solid reliable in his moderation, and always 100% impartial in handling moderation complaints. The future of the Cupcakes forum looks good! Then, however, the neurotic founding member loses his cool and writes some posts that are in breach of the Cupcakes forum charter: members make complaints about these posts. The high quality moderator takes the appropriate action.

1. The Cupcakes FG still wishes to be seen as a strong, unified team, so at this point they undermine the high quality moderator.

1a. The high quality moderator is intelligent, and will realise that this is a serious risk, and will therefore not stand in the first place.

2. When I was a moderator, I would recuse myself from moderation complaints about my own posts. A single moderator will be unable to do this.

[Eelco de Groot]

Where is upvote button as Ed said ?
As argued elsewhere *), if a moderator team would stand for election, in the past it would have a much better chance of being chosen. If I am mistaken please point this out. What Graham is saying is just one obvious reason why. Why change this. It is not as if there are tons of people applying right now I count only Andrew.
If there were three Andrews they would keep each other in check and keep each other alive. So what if they would be clones or alternate personalities of themselves. Seriously if they perceived the job as important much of the clowning around would disappear. (I wanted to write more about that to explain but have not done yet. It's like in a dog pack. If something is perceived as important there is no discussion. The pack closes ranks, it moves as one. There is a line in Rosemary Sutcliff's 'Warrior Scarlet' about this I should find it.)

* ) Well I wanted to write that down but could not find the words yet.

Re: Triumvirate

But why changing the system for the moderator elections? I do not really understand. That there will be politics, is inevitable. That there will be turmoil; do not be surprised. It's like a democracy after all. If moderators have to work alone for six months who wants to do that? Only in case you had Fabien Letouzey and Tord Romstad together there were no quarrels. But they were exceptional.

[Ciekce]

<snipped for brevity>
I still stand by that.

with that much dedication to the green sky I'd be getting myself checked for colour blindness