I was more referring to the 'low-level programmer' remark.
Not everyone considers assembly programming a virtue...
I am not a native English speaker, so I don't know how much my opinion is worth here. But 'mediocre' does not sound to me like a politically correct qualification. 'Somewhat weaker engines' sounds much nicer.
If you insult my engine, you insult me!
To be frank: I thought that your remark
i notice that there are several members here with Mediocre Engines that have an awful lot of negative comments to post
oddly i never see these engines in high level competition
now why is that i wonder??
was way out of line and totally uncalled for. To notice and object to a violation of the rules, you don't have to be a good programmer or author of a strong engine. So to mention the alleged quality of a plaintiff's engine really serves no purpose and can be construed as a below-the-belt blow.
That only authors of engines seem to note such violations (and by definition the bulk of all engines do not qualify as top engines) is likely to be caused by the fact that there is no need for non programmers (and thus non-participants) to be aware of the rules.
Using such 'arguments' to discredit someone who has a justified complaint does not seem kosher to me. Unintended cheating is still cheating, and although I would not have picked that wordin myself, the one who did clearly indicated he did not use that word in its sharpest meaning by writing it between quotes.
any good level with their engines. You just said that because you disagreed with them.
