ICGA response to ChessBase 4-part article

[bob]

First, an introduction letter from David:

Subject: The ICGA's rebuttal to Soren Riis's article on Chessbase.com re
the Rybka scandal


This week Dr Soren Riis posted a four part article on Chessbase.com in a
somewhat belated attempt to defend Vasik Rajlich. Regular readers will
recall that Rajlich's actions led the International Computer Games
Association (ICGA) to find him guilty of breaking a crucial tournament rule,
as a result of which the chess program Rybka was stripped of its World
Computer Chess Champion titles and Rajlich was banned for life from ICGA
events.



Dr Riis gave his article a title to suggest that a miscarriage of justice
has taken place. The ICGA now responds with two rebuttal articles, one by
myself (as President of the ICGA) concerning some of the legalistic points
raised by Riis's article, and a robust detailed and thorough technical
rebuttal by Mark Watkins.


Everyone interested in the Rybka scandal should read both of these
rebuttals and then decide for themselves who and what they believe - Dr Riis
or the ICGA's investigation report.


Dr David Levy
President - ICGA

Here are two links, to read David's direct analysis, click the following link:
http://www.harveywilliamson.com/ICGA/DL ... th2012.doc

To read Mark's point-by-point evisceration of Soren Riis' article, click the following link:
http://harveywilliamson.com/ICGA/Riis3.pdf

Since there was no technical content, I removed the other thread to avoid confusion. Future comments should go here, this one will stick around.

When members sought to post either the pro-Rajlich views of Søren Riis or neutral comments on the issue then they were all shunted off to the invisibility (to non-members) of the Engine Forum. Yet when the Grand Inquisitor himself initiates yet another unending spew of anti-Rajlich posts then the thread is put - and remains - on the main CCC forum.

Is there any reason for this - other than the one that is obvious to all of us?

This seems to be "general computer chess".

Any other complaints?

Fonts too small? Color selection too limited?

[Rebel]

If you are calling Riis' article "garbage" then we actually agree on something.

garbage is generally the bi product of usefully things


so we cannot agree with you

Point taken, so I retract my agreement.

+1

Do I see a love affair in the make ?

[natasha]

If you are calling Riis' article "garbage" then we actually agree on something.

garbage is generally the bi product of usefully things


so we cannot agree with you

Point taken, so I retract my agreement.

+1

Do I see a love affair in the make ?

Ed with your perceptions we think you see whatever vas tells you


please dont be green eyed , Bobs all yours if you can tear yourself away from vas's pulling your (heart / purse) strings that is

[Roger Brown]

When members sought to post either the pro-Rajlich views of Søren Riis or neutral comments on the issue then they were all shunted off to the invisibility (to non-members) of the Engine Forum. Yet when the Grand Inquisitor himself initiates yet another unending spew of anti-Rajlich posts then the thread is put - and remains - on the main CCC forum.

Is there any reason for this - other than the one that is obvious to all of us?

Hello Derek,

Just saw this. I was otherwise occupied for a while....

I know that you are a master of the language so I must conclude that you are aware that your post clearly suggests that there is a moderator agenda.

Despite this, I am going to attempt to explain yet again.

There is no such agenda. There was one thread which I moved, not to shunt the posts to invisibility but because in my judgement - which you may criticise at will - it properly belonged there.

The invisibility of that forum pre-dated my moderator terms here. My personal preference is well known - let everybody talk the the thing to death and move on.

The Chessbase articles offered more of the same re-hashing of the problem and offered nothing new in terms of informational content.

The anti-ICGA, anti-Hyatt, anti-Grand Inquisitor posts are here as well in all their glory for all to see. No agenda there either. In fact, there is every view - pro, con and the tired neutrals.

Right now I say it again and again until I bore everyone with it - the only person who can clear up this issue with a wave of the hand is Vas. Before someone says what I did not intend to say let me clarify - I am not saying that Vas is guilty or that he must prove his innocence. Indeed, he is under no obligation to say anything at all.

I am simply stating what has appeared to be obvious to me from the beginning - Vas is the only person that make all of this attacking, spamming, heat, noise, divisiveness etc. disappear. Only Vas.

Not me. Not you. Not the 1,000 posters here and elsewhere.

I am going to slightly change my statement about Vas speaking. With respect to the supposed Ippo family of engines he does have an obligation to prove that assertions about them being Rybka clones are true - or publicly state that they are not so that they may be freely entered into tournaments etc.

It is ironic that a number of the "post it all here" group then proceed to lodge complaints about these very threads requiring moderator intervention.

You may disagree with the invisibility of the Engines Origins forum but is it an option to selectively move threads from there to the General Forum?

What would be the reason to deny others who have requested that various other posts detailing the supposed Rybka clones be moved here as well?

Perhaps the membership should vote on that as an issue for the next set of moderators about to come into the position.

I cannot and do not accept that I must be hovering over the board at all hours of the day and night to edit or delete or move posts by members who insist on behaving less than amiably.

Be passionate and all but there is a line between that and the rest of it.

Obviously there can be a discussion as to whether the forum is moderated and the effectiveness or lack thereof. Some believe that the forum is not moderated, some believe that at least one of the moderators is out of control and over-moderating.

I cannot imagine a more diverse set of personalities than the current three moderators. We are so far apart in temperament that it would make agreeing on a plot or agenda an impossible feat. Seriously.

Clearly, my statement about the non-existence of an agenda will scarcely be believed by those who know that there is an agenda but I offer it nonetheless.

Later.

[gerold]

Plus 10.

[Laskos]

When members sought to post either the pro-Rajlich views of Søren Riis or neutral comments on the issue then they were all shunted off to the invisibility (to non-members) of the Engine Forum. Yet when the Grand Inquisitor himself initiates yet another unending spew of anti-Rajlich posts then the thread is put - and remains - on the main CCC forum.

Is there any reason for this - other than the one that is obvious to all of us?

Hello Derek,

Just saw this. I was otherwise occupied for a while....

I know that you are a master of the language so I must conclude that you are aware that your post clearly suggests that there is a moderator agenda.

Despite this, I am going to attempt to explain yet again.

There is no such agenda. There was one thread which I moved, not to shunt the posts to invisibility but because in my judgement - which you may criticise at will - it properly belonged there.

The invisibility of that forum pre-dated my moderator terms here. My personal preference is well known - let everybody talk the the thing to death and move on.

The Chessbase articles offered more of the same re-hashing of the problem and offered nothing new in terms of informational content.

The anti-ICGA, anti-Hyatt, anti-Grand Inquisitor posts are here as well in all their glory for all to see. No agenda there either. In fact, there is every view - pro, con and the tired neutrals.

Right now I say it again and again until I bore everyone with it - the only person who can clear up this issue with a wave of the hand is Vas. Before someone says what I did not intend to say let me clarify - I am not saying that Vas is guilty or that he must prove his innocence. Indeed, he is under no obligation to say anything at all.

I am simply stating what has appeared to be obvious to me from the beginning - Vas is the only person that make all of this attacking, spamming, heat, noise, divisiveness etc. disappear. Only Vas.

Not me. Not you. Not the 1,000 posters here and elsewhere.

I am going to slightly change my statement about Vas speaking. With respect to the supposed Ippo family of engines he does have an obligation to prove that assertions about them being Rybka clones are true - or publicly state that they are not so that they may be freely entered into tournaments etc.

It is ironic that a number of the "post it all here" group then proceed to lodge complaints about these very threads requiring moderator intervention.

You may disagree with the invisibility of the Engines Origins forum but is it an option to selectively move threads from there to the General Forum?

What would be the reason to deny others who have requested that various other posts detailing the supposed Rybka clones be moved here as well?

Perhaps the membership should vote on that as an issue for the next set of moderators about to come into the position.

I cannot and do not accept that I must be hovering over the board at all hours of the day and night to edit or delete or move posts by members who insist on behaving less than amiably.

Be passionate and all but there is a line between that and the rest of it.

Obviously there can be a discussion as to whether the forum is moderated and the effectiveness or lack thereof. Some believe that the forum is not moderated, some believe that at least one of the moderators is out of control and over-moderating.

I cannot imagine a more diverse set of personalities than the current three moderators. We are so far apart in temperament that it would make agreeing on a plot or agenda an impossible feat. Seriously.

Clearly, my statement about the non-existence of an agenda will scarcely be believed by those who know that there is an agenda but I offer it nonetheless.

Later.

Ippo issue is almost solved. Vas said that IPPOLIT seems to him not to be original, because it doesn't seem typed manually. Still, he has to prove that it is a clone of Rybka. RobboLito IS original, as Vas said, (therefore all other Ippos), because it was typed by hand. Why did you not read his important statements? Basically, Ippos are cleared, only about the initial, and rarely used IPPOLIT, Vas has to prove it to be a clone of Rybka, other Ippos were typed by hand, therefore original, as he explicitly said.

Besides that, something is illegal when proved not to be legal, right?

Kai

[Sven]

Ippo issue is almost solved. Vas said that IPPOLIT seems to him not to be original, because it doesn't seem typed manually. Still, he has to prove that it is a clone of Rybka. RobboLito IS original, as Vas said, (therefore all other Ippos), because it was typed by hand. Why did you not read his important statements? Basically, Ippos are cleared, only about the initial, and rarely used IPPOLIT, Vas has to prove it to be a clone of Rybka, other Ippos were typed by hand, therefore original, as he explicitly said.

Besides that, something is illegal when proved not to be legal, right?

I disagree on "Robbolito was typed by hand", this is certainly wrong, it evolved from Ippolit via translating, editing, splitting into separate source files, possibly fixing bugs, and making some improvements.

Sven

[natasha]

Ippo issue is almost solved. Vas said that IPPOLIT seems to him not to be original, because it doesn't seem typed manually. Still, he has to prove that it is a clone of Rybka. RobboLito IS original, as Vas said, (therefore all other Ippos), because it was typed by hand. Why did you not read his important statements? Basically, Ippos are cleared, only about the initial, and rarely used IPPOLIT, Vas has to prove it to be a clone of Rybka, other Ippos were typed by hand, therefore original, as he explicitly said.

Besides that, something is illegal when proved not to be legal, right?

I disagree on "Robbolito was typed by hand", this is certainly wrong, it evolved from Ippolit via translating, editing, splitting into separate source files, possibly fixing bugs, and making some improvements.

Sven

your definition of typed by hand is what exactly

no one we know has ever stated robbolito is not evolved from iggorit

ie the same beginnings

[Laskos]

Ippo issue is almost solved. Vas said that IPPOLIT seems to him not to be original, because it doesn't seem typed manually. Still, he has to prove that it is a clone of Rybka. RobboLito IS original, as Vas said, (therefore all other Ippos), because it was typed by hand. Why did you not read his important statements? Basically, Ippos are cleared, only about the initial, and rarely used IPPOLIT, Vas has to prove it to be a clone of Rybka, other Ippos were typed by hand, therefore original, as he explicitly said.

Besides that, something is illegal when proved not to be legal, right?

I disagree on "Robbolito was typed by hand", this is certainly wrong, it evolved from Ippolit via translating, editing, splitting into separate source files, possibly fixing bugs, and making some improvements.

Sven

It was Vas statement. First, no one accuses anymore RobboLito (therefore the following Ippos) of anything. Second, something is illegal when proved not to be legal. Fine? You guys have some elementary notions of Roman law, beginning from the Twelve Tables (~440 BC)? Funny folks.

Kai

[natasha]

Ippo issue is almost solved. Vas said that IPPOLIT seems to him not to be original, because it doesn't seem typed manually. Still, he has to prove that it is a clone of Rybka. RobboLito IS original, as Vas said, (therefore all other Ippos), because it was typed by hand. Why did you not read his important statements? Basically, Ippos are cleared, only about the initial, and rarely used IPPOLIT, Vas has to prove it to be a clone of Rybka, other Ippos were typed by hand, therefore original, as he explicitly said.

Besides that, something is illegal when proved not to be legal, right?

I disagree on "Robbolito was typed by hand", this is certainly wrong, it evolved from Ippolit via translating, editing, splitting into separate source files, possibly fixing bugs, and making some improvements.

Sven

It was Vas statement. First, no one accuses anymore RobboLito (therefore the following Ippos) of anything. Second, something is illegal when proved not to be legal. Fine? You guys have some elementary notions of Roman law, beginning from the Twelve Tables (~440 BC)? Funny folks.

Kai

+1