It's Bob who incriminated Mark, not me.

And as I said I have a hard time to believe the story.

The story broke here, 5 days ago.

http://74.220.23.57/forum/viewtopic.php?p=456992&sid=c660764c429c9b996444852266cea7d8#456992


This >= vs > was mentioned by Mark Watkins during the panel discussions ...

Loud and clear.
You were deliberately withholding crucial information since 2010. Worse, you hinting here Mark also knew. What you are saying here is that Mark deliberately left the false information in his document. Cheating the Panel. Cheating those who signed the Fabien letter. I signed the ...

Loud and clear.
You were deliberately withholding crucial information since 2010. Worse, you hinting here Mark also knew. What you are saying here is that Mark deliberately left the false information in his document. Cheating the Panel. Cheating those who signed the Fabien letter. I signed the ...

Loud and clear.
You were deliberately withholding crucial information since 2010. Worse, you hinting here Mark also knew. What you are saying here is that Mark deliberately left the false information in his document. Cheating the Panel. Cheating those who signed the Fabien letter. I signed the ...

syzygy wrote:It is not up to you to decide whether leaving this out is unimportant. The purpose of the document is to present the evidence to the reader, so that the reader can make up his mind himself. Or am I missing something here?

A sense of proportion.

While in principle, I agree that it may sometimes be possible to detect copyright infringement from examination of binary executables, in general, I think that this should really just be used to get the subpoena to view the actual source rather than to form some kind of decision. After all, we *do ...

While in principle, I agree that it may sometimes be possible to detect copyright infringement from examination of binary executables, in general, I think that this should really just be used to get the subpoena to view the actual source rather than to form some kind of decision. After all, we *do ...

While in principle, I agree that it may sometimes be possible to detect copyright infringement from examination of binary executables, in general, I think that this should really just be used to get the subpoena to view the actual source rather than to form some kind of decision. After all, we *do ...

MoldyJacket wrote:Not that I care anymore (a recent reference link lead me to his/her posts), but RegicideX was accepted as a valid name? Guess I should have dry-cleaned my jacket before applying!

FWIW, the RegicideX account was deleted.

While Bob has made it a major issue to defame me as a retarded chess programmer, trust me, Fruit's EVAL is nothing special, it's just good. Rebel has everything Fruit has and more AND already in the 80's. From the early accusations back in 2006 till now only the 0.0 still stands as strong evidence ...