Dann Corbit wrote:If the juror has already formed a fixed opinion based on prior knowledge or prejudice related to a material issue in the case, then he will be excused from serving on that jury.
You mean like when Vas acted as judge, jury and prosecutor in the Ippolit affair?
+1!
Unfortunately, Vas was the _perfect_ person to make that particular claim. Just as I was the perfect person to claim that Vas copied Crafty to produce the pre-beta Rybkas like 1.6.1... The original author is uniquely qualified to recognize his own code, his own coding style, and his known coding mistakes...
So his actions there were not so bad. The only thing lacking was that he never offered any proof, while there is plenty of proof about the 1.6.1 vs Crafty case, offered in the report we compiled. Proof would have solved a lot of problems because then we would not be up to our armpits with all the ip*/robo* clones...
Agreed.
But if he didn't offer any proof after all that time... Don't you think there might be a good reason ?
Is it because he miraculously loses all his code, and just ends up with *.exe files of Rybka ?
Or is it simply because there *is* no such proof ?
A third reason. Offering proof would also offer proof that he had copied Fruit. Caught between a rock and a hard place...
