OpenChess

My previous post wasnt logged but oh well.

The crux of my question is that if the ICGA group was trying to determine the truth about a particular subject why were members of the committee/panel/board that had already made their feelings and decisions clear allowed to participate and vote on a decision? It seems to me that the panel was already loaded members who felt that Vaz was guilty verdict from the start.

I am making an assumption that because several of the key accusers are well educated they are familiar with at least the basic outline of how boards and meetings should be run. Considering the political, financial and professional issues involved in a case such as this where a World Champion was to be ousted from "its" throne, I think the public expects at least some degree of professionalism during these proceedings.

It seems to me that basic ethical conduct at such meetings where particular persons have a clear, preconceived belief or vested interested (EMOTIONAL OR FINANCIAL) in the outcome should not participate. I listed in my previous post several names that entered the situation with Vaz's guilt already a forgone conclusion and the proceedings were just a "formality"
Bluntly, Why did the key accusing members not recuse themselves from the preceedings?
Why not just present the information and their findings and leave the room to let the panel make its own decisions?

some other minor questions in reading the posts.
Is code copying from Crafty an issue? my reading so far has said that early versions of rybka were clearly direct crafty but i see nothing indicating that in versions in question.

What version(s) of Rybka participated in the ICGA events that have led to this ban?

A lot of focus has been on the semantics:
define what the ICGA used as the definition of Code copying


Define plagerism in the context of programming?
(my sense is this is where there are two schools of thought on this and the major clash occurring over what this means and where the line is.)

The definition of that in the academic sense is very broad and applies better to papers and other articles..the word plagerize is used on the ICGA website as the reason for Rybka's ban so this is a central point.

hyatt wrote: So no dishonesty on Zach's part,

Don't imply I ever called Zach dishonest you bully, I never did.

Instead look in the mirror, you, Robert Hyatt, wishing Jeroen Noomen dead.

EDIT, just see Uly beat me to it.

guys. it really hurts to see you doing this fight.

i wonder how much this is due to the fact that we cannot meet each other in a pub,
and drink together, instead we turn arround opponents words and stuff until it is a scholastic debate.

it seems words lead to war.

we should meet more often in real life. this would help to stop these endless arguments.

Jeremy Bernstein wrote:I'll need access to the forum posting stats for this. As a randomly-chosen example, Jeroen has posted 500 mostly Rybka/ICGA-related messages in the last 20 days (I can't see more than his last 500 posts, though).

bob replied to most of them. Jeroen also posted messages unrelated to the case (while all of bob's posts are about it). bob also replied to most other people talking about it with him. bob also made thousands of messages about it in other fora, while Jeroen only does it in Rybka Forum.

So, you can't say Jeroen is as "freaky"/"desperate" about it as bob.

thorstenczub wrote:i wonder how much this is due to the fact that we cannot meet each other in a pub,
and drink together,

I don't drink alcohol but I agree, if I met Jeremy in person I'd probably bring a chess board and we'd have a nice game instead of discussing the ICGA's issues which would seem like a waste of time in that scenario. I wouldn't like to meet bob in person though

Uly wrote: I wouldn't like to meet bob in person though

Just shows what a jerk you are. I am in the relatively unique position of having met most of the current players in Computer Chess. In the Pub I have got on with all of them. I think idiots like you should actually visit a Computer Chess event and see how well everybody gets on.

Uly wrote:
I don't drink alcohol but I agree, if I met Jeremy in person I'd probably bring a chess board and we'd have a nice game instead of discussing the ICGA's issues which would seem like a waste of time in that scenario. I wouldn't like to meet bob in person though

I don't drink alcohol either, and if I recall correctly, Bob stated the same, so there, you both already have something in common.

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Just shows what a jerk you are. I am in the relatively unique position of having met most of the current players in Computer Chess. In the Pub I have got on with all of them. I think idiots like you should actually visit a Computer Chess event and see how well everybody gets on.

Wow Harvey, thanks for the personal attacks even if you didn't have anything useful to contribute to the thread. It gets to show who's really what you called me. It made my day.

Uly wrote:

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Just shows what a jerk you are. I am in the relatively unique position of having met most of the current players in Computer Chess. In the Pub I have got on with all of them. I think idiots like you should actually visit a Computer Chess event and see how well everybody gets on.

Wow Harvey, thanks for the personal attacks even if you didn't have anything useful to contribute to the thread. It gets to show who's really what you called me. It made my day.

Wow if thats the best you can do i am very happy.

Harvey Williamson wrote:

Uly wrote: I wouldn't like to meet bob in person though

Just shows what a jerk you are. I am in the relatively unique position of having met most of the current players in Computer Chess. In the Pub I have got on with all of them. I think idiots like you should actually visit a Computer Chess event and see how well everybody gets on.

indeed. i can only support this.
we are all enjoying computerchess in general.

Harvey Williamson wrote:

Uly wrote: I wouldn't like to meet bob in person though

Just shows what a jerk you are. I am in the relatively unique position of having met most of the current players in Computer Chess. In the Pub I have got on with all of them. I think idiots like you should actually visit a Computer Chess event and see how well everybody gets on.

I don't think that is fair or appropriate as things can go downhill from here once we get into the back and forth of name calling. Let's all try to be nice.