syzygy wrote:Note how Vas had to bear the responsibility for his decision to enter those tournaments. Such responsibility cannot be forced upon Marco/Joona/Tord without their explicit agreement. Arguing that the GPL implies such agreement is nonsensical.
Note that the GPL is also very explicit in denying any liability for the usage of the program. So Tord et al. could never be hold accountable for any rule violations, in the same way that Vas was held accountable. This liability would fall solely on the person(s) entering Stockfish.
syzygy wrote:Note how Vas had to bear the responsibility for his decision to enter those tournaments. Such responsibility cannot be forced upon Marco/Joona/Tord without their explicit agreement. Arguing that the GPL implies such agreement is nonsensical.
Note that the GPL is also very explicit in denying any liability for the usage of the program. So Tord et al. could never be hold accountable for any rule violations, in the same way that Vas was held accountable. This liability would fall solely on the person(s) entering Stockfish.
"How to investigate such allegations and deal with cloning?
The ICGA intends to set up a forum for investigating prima facia claims of cloning in the world of computer strategy games. Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA will result in sanctions being imposed by the ICGA on the offending persons, who will be named and shamed on the Internet. "
syzygy wrote:Note how Vas had to bear the responsibility for his decision to enter those tournaments. Such responsibility cannot be forced upon Marco/Joona/Tord without their explicit agreement. Arguing that the GPL implies such agreement is nonsensical.
Note that the GPL is also very explicit in denying any liability for the usage of the program. So Tord et al. could never be hold accountable for any rule violations, in the same way that Vas was held accountable. This liability would fall solely on the person(s) entering Stockfish.
"How to investigate such allegations and deal with cloning?
The ICGA intends to set up a forum for investigating prima facia claims of cloning in the world of computer strategy games. Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA will result in sanctions being imposed by the ICGA on the offending persons, who will be named and shamed on the Internet. "
syzygy wrote:Note how Vas had to bear the responsibility for his decision to enter those tournaments. Such responsibility cannot be forced upon Marco/Joona/Tord without their explicit agreement. Arguing that the GPL implies such agreement is nonsensical.
Note that the GPL is also very explicit in denying any liability for the usage of the program. So Tord et al. could never be hold accountable for any rule violations, in the same way that Vas was held accountable. This liability would fall solely on the person(s) entering Stockfish.
"How to investigate such allegations and deal with cloning?
The ICGA intends to set up a forum for investigating prima facia claims of cloning in the world of computer strategy games. Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA will result in sanctions being imposed by the ICGA on the offending persons, who will be named and shamed on the Internet. "
Miguel
Seriously, what's wrong with that?
Perhaps it should read:
"How to investigate such allegations and deal with cloning?
The ICGA intends to set up a forum for investigating prima facia claims of cloning in the world of computer strategy games. Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA will result in sanctions being imposed by the ICGA on the offending persons, who do not need to worry as the ICGA decisions will not be published anywhere. "
syzygy wrote:Note how Vas had to bear the responsibility for his decision to enter those tournaments. Such responsibility cannot be forced upon Marco/Joona/Tord without their explicit agreement. Arguing that the GPL implies such agreement is nonsensical.
Note that the GPL is also very explicit in denying any liability for the usage of the program. So Tord et al. could never be hold accountable for any rule violations, in the same way that Vas was held accountable. This liability would fall solely on the person(s) entering Stockfish.
"How to investigate such allegations and deal with cloning?
The ICGA intends to set up a forum for investigating prima facia claims of cloning in the world of computer strategy games. Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA will result in sanctions being imposed by the ICGA on the offending persons, who will be named and shamed on the Internet. "
Miguel
Seriously, what's wrong with that?
Perhaps it should read:
"How to investigate such allegations and deal with cloning?
The ICGA intends to set up a forum for investigating prima facia claims of cloning in the world of computer strategy games. Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA will result in sanctions being imposed by the ICGA on the offending persons, who do not need to worry as the ICGA decisions will not be published anywhere. "
syzygy wrote:Note how Vas had to bear the responsibility for his decision to enter those tournaments. Such responsibility cannot be forced upon Marco/Joona/Tord without their explicit agreement. Arguing that the GPL implies such agreement is nonsensical.
Note that the GPL is also very explicit in denying any liability for the usage of the program. So Tord et al. could never be hold accountable for any rule violations, in the same way that Vas was held accountable. This liability would fall solely on the person(s) entering Stockfish.
"How to investigate such allegations and deal with cloning?
The ICGA intends to set up a forum for investigating prima facia claims of cloning in the world of computer strategy games. Claims that are proven to the satisfaction of the ICGA will result in sanctions being imposed by the ICGA on the offending persons, who will be named and shamed on the Internet. "
Miguel
Seriously, what's wrong with that?
I showed you were the quote came from. Are you just pretending you do not know that was the point?
bob wrote: I think that in this case, the ONLY opinion that will hold any weight will be the opinion(s) of the three primary authors ONLY.
"Primary author" is certainly an interesting conversational concept, but it is too ill defined to be part of any formal rule. All there is for an open source project is the list of authors which for SF comprises some 80 names. Some of those have made it explicitly known in the past that they would like SF to participate.
Ideas=science. Simplification=engineering.
Without ideas there is nothing to simplify.
bob wrote: I think that in this case, the ONLY opinion that will hold any weight will be the opinion(s) of the three primary authors ONLY.
"Primary author" is certainly an interesting conversational concept, but it is too ill defined to be part of any formal rule. All there is for an open source project is the list of authors which for SF comprises some 80 names. Some of those have made it explicitly known in the past that they would like SF to participate.
I don't think anyone cares about the contributor list. ONLY the three programmers that have claimed responsibility for the program...
bob wrote:I don't think anyone cares about the contributor list.
Given how much of SF's elo by now is due to "non-primary" contributors, this is really a strong thing to say.
Maybe they should also be able to veto participation in an author-based competition. Or at least those that contributed "significantly".
The ICGA can of course make an exception for SF and accept it as a "non-author-based entry". That might upset some of the participants, but if it's for the good of the ICGA and/or its leadership, they might not care too much. (Sorry for that, but I just read the whole GUNDA story.)
