Prima wrote:thorstenczub wrote:
what shall we do with the self alleged cloning hunters who hunted the wrong people,
blackmailed and censored computerchess boards for years ?
what shall we do with these mc_carthy dirt, those gestapo-guys with the narcistic personality disorder ?
It gets even 'better', Thorstenczub. Now a poster on CCC forum made this statement, when confronted about the apparent hypocrisy, deceit, censorship demonstrated by this individual and his entire chess computer chess gangs. I quote this person:
Personally, I'm waiting for this to play out further before making any big decisions.
Once Fabien says that he has examined all the facts for himself and states that Rybka is undeniably nothing more than a Fruit ripoff and which versions this applies to (statements that he would be prepared to defend in a legal sense), I will be perfectly happy to personally stop testing those versions and to advocate for their removal from the CCRL rating lists (although I'm only one of a dozen or so testers, so that decision would be a group one).
Which
versions this applies to....and....
stop testing those versions??!!! Is this suppose to be a clause to still protect and support Ry*ka at all cost? This is hilarious in itself.
These guys just won't stop with the endless and unsupported excuses to keep using and testing Ry*ka. They even make a version-clause - indirectly calling Mr. Fabien Letouzy a liar and untrustworthy (my interpretation here). Why should Fabien Letouzey have to prove 'which Ry*ka version' is Fruit-based and, I quote here;
(statements that he would be prepared to defend in a legal sense)
?
But in a similar situation where Vas made the accusation that Ippoli and RobboLito is a Ry*ka 3 clone, the likes of this poster did not ask Vas to prove which version of Ippolit/RobboLito were Ry*ka 3 clone. Nor did they 'encourage' Vas to make accusing
statements that he would be prepared to defend in a legal sense.
Also, the excuse that Ry*ka 3 source code was lost (or stolen?) is unbelievable. My personal opinion is that this is a ruse to give the impression that Ry*ka 4 is ' yet another original Ry*ka engine', or totally unrelated to its previous Fruit-based versions. I strongly believe that Fruit 2.1 was/is in Ry*ka 1.0 beta, therefore Fruit's concepts has to be transferred to Ry*ka 2, Ry*ka 3, and then to Ry*ka 4's versions. It may be tweaked but nevertheless, Fruit is present in all Ry*kas.
To surmise, based on the logic of these guys or Rybka-fan boys, it's okay for Vas to take an open source GPL code and increase his Ry*ka many hundred ELOs, then makes it close source/not release source - a direct violation of GPL license. He then goes commercial with the GPL-obtained code to improve subsequent Ry**a versions without releasing the source codes but he's not asked to defend his ethics, in relation to the Fruit-Ry*ka GPL license in court, despite numerous and respectable programmers' conclusion that Ry*ka is definitely a Fruit-clone. I could go on here.....
It's funny that now that Ry*ka is on the defensive side here, this poster is willing to "
Personally, I'm wait for this to play out further before making any big decisions." Interesting concept. Where was this civil concept when Vas made an unfounded clone claim that Ippolit and RobboLito are Ry*ka 3 clones? Where was this civil gesture from the chessbase Sysops/ certain-forum-moderators before censoring and banning people from both forums and playchess server?
Are other sane people seeing these and the double standard hypocrisy going on here?
].
