If the mistrial results from judicial or prosecutorial misconduct, a retrial will be barred. In other word the previous verdict is dismissed.
No appeal - there was no court of law to appeal to.
Bean was known for his unusual rulings. In one case, an Irishman named Paddy O'Rourke shot a Chinese laborer. A mob of 200 angry Irishmen surrounded the courtroom and saloon and threatened to lynch Bean if O'Rourke was not freed. After looking through his law book, Bean ruled that "homicide was the killing of a human being; however, he could find no law against killing a Chinaman".
Bean dismissed the case.
Actually, that sounds more like levy!
I don't think giving up any source code after 7 years is necessary. Time to move on from that demand.
Had Fabien Letouzey continued to develop Fruit and not stopped after 2006 and made it freeware As of July 23, 2007- that was his decision and he move on - he could have stayed in the game, or just before he bowed out, would have been a perfect time to start a " you are using my code "-flame war.
But to wait 4 years and at the behest of those who very probably had an ax to grind against Vas- is a bit much! Especially considering it was a time when Rybka was on top of her game for the past few years.
I'm sure not just a few programmers were dying to get rid of Vas and make Rybka disappear from the number one spot, even if it meant doing it in the most loathsome way possible.
I would conclude this whole episode to be the most deranged in the history of computer chess.
> Mark, seriously, source code for which version-surely not Rybka 4.1. -
> and Vas, already stated he didn't have the source code for Rybka 3.
He surely must have the source for a version close to 3, though, don't you agree?
> I don't think giving up any source code after 7 years is necessary. Time to move on from that demand.
The lifetime ban is obviously still an issue, so why not clear it up in the easiest way possible? If there are still some secrets left in the old code, they could just be redacted.
Or, if Levy happened across a poster asking if anyone found their cat- he'd probably call the concerned party and tell them that Rajlich probably stole the cat.
What is so apparent to me is the negligent way the entire affair was conducted.
To say NOW it is okay to justify the way Levy rushed the process - and then having no control over that process- or willingness to take control over that process. I suppose we would have to grant him some cognizance of having the perceptive ability to begin with, to be aware of the process he he set in motion, but I don't think so! Either way he's screwed, isn't he? Levy kind of disappeared! Left Hyatt to run amok - to rant and rave during that process- one of the Secretariat.
I've posted example after example of how Levy exhibited a lack of control over the process and made erroneous , if not megalomaniacal determination of his influence exceeding beyond the ICGA in penalizing Vas. Levy- if he isn't deranged- had no business forming an inquisition- let alone running one.
If that is all you have left in your hand, is to cut a deal with a nutter, like the Chamberlain Munich Agreement, then you do it and hope for the best. Tournament or two???
At this point it isn't about the ICGA - it is about FIDE's credibility to allow themselves to be represented by an organization that is contemptuous of following ethical standards.
If Vas wants to cut a deal that is totally up him.
My solution- restate all Rybka wins. No questions asked, with a written agreement that should Vas ever enters any future ICGA competition he must submit his source code as penalty for the Crafty incident.
Beyond that, I don't think Vas has intentions upon entering any future ICGA organized competition.
Vas, would be vindicated - leaving the ICGA to go their own way- and FIDE can breathe a sigh of relief.
> and FIDE can breathe a sigh of relief.
I really don't think FIDE could care less whatever happens. As far as the ICGA goes the only thing they should review is the life sentence.
> After the verdict, the burden of proof falls on the accused.
In this case, the verdict came first (though whether or not the verdict came before the sentence is an interesting question), and the accusations and "evidence" came later. That's not justice, either.
the panel summary was breached rule 2, derivative, plagiarism (I think). Note that plagiarism is an undefined legal concept, it seems desigend to mean whatever you want it to mean.
the ICGA summary was breached tournament rules, plagiarism but added "plagiarism was most serious possible against peers and ICGA" or something along those lines.
the sanctions/punishment part of the ICGA process (which was the part that earnt the ICGA the bringing FIDE into disrepute sanction, for ignoring the law) used the "most serious possible etc" to justify the extra-legal punishments including the life ban.
so, it is arguable that the sexing up of the verdict with the "most serious possible" (actually objectively a false statement, think about it) was PART OF the extra-legal disreputable process. Which would make the verdict as untenable, legally, as is the life ban, and for the same reason.
Is there any doubt in your mind that Mark Lefler (or Mark Uniake) are going through Stockfish forwards and backwards and taking many things? And would you respect them more or less if the answer was no?
This was all a rather silly exercise that could only be embraced by academics and people trying to win tournaments in the past that they couldn't win over the board...
> I very much doubt Vas will take further actions, but if he does, the effort expended on the FIDE EC action will have been worthwhile.
Seems like the path of least effort, if Vas wanted to clear his name, would be releasing the source code of the Rybka version in question (or if that isn't available, a version close to the version in question). At this point, I doubt there are any secrets left in the old source code.
> Consequently, EC has no competence about the merit of ICGA’s decision concerning Mr Rajlich’s behaviour and alleged violations of ICGA internal rules, nor about ICGA’s reconstruction of some alleged facts of “plagiarism” or “cheating” during the World Computer Chess Championships.
But the EC does have competence over the consequences of HOW the ICGA conducts "its" behavior with regard to these alleged violations of "plagiarism " or "cheating". during the World Computer Chess Championships.
FIDE cannot have it both ways!
Clearly! FIDE is protecting the ICGA!
They were smart in giving you to believe they were on your side by stating that Vas was dealt with unfairly - that was their piece of candy that they paid for before they took the store.
Was it Ethical the way the evidence was presented or the way Hyatt acquired 1.6.1? It sounds like to me that the EC was freaked over the depth of those questions. The whole issue spelled trouble- presenting that data as evidence- using it in verdict. They almost have to rule on as questionable at best. They looked at the quickest way out- "Oh! rule change -2011! Sorry! Cannot help you there! "
Once they were able to put a wedge between the two issues it was over.
There intention was to minimize as much of the impact of the complaint as was possible against the ICGA.
There is something else to mention. It's mentioned in the full verdict. We (Vas, Chris, Soren and me) filed a second complaint as a supplement and asked for an appeal. See - [ http://www.top-5000.nl/Zach/FIDE-Supplement.pdf ]
As you can see the document is signed by Vas and co-signed by Chris, Soren and me.
The appeal was dismissed because (we assume) it was mailed from my account instead of Vas or Chris. It's what the text implies.
Yeah! No wonder they didn't want this bit of funner in the mix.
> Trou du cul
I take it back - I was going to be civil but - I'm sick of bullshit like this slipping by so casually out of your mouth. You can be the most offensive creature.
You've lost your license to practice for being a complete unreasonable asshole. You use your sickness as an excuse to say the most vile things. What is unforgivable is that you do know better. You do know what you are about and you do it for effect.
I just have to think back on all that you've written
and your avartar no longer reads "awrist" it reads
"Trou du cul"
and mine - should be crystal clear now !
what is going on with you? Why so much confusion? Perhaps this true description of the event could explain to you, especially because of your undoubtable smartness, that nothing in my message wass something that could offend you if you look upon it with a minimum of objectivity. I think it was you who mentioned the talkchess page. So I became interested and opened the link. I read a message from someone called Alain Distel. I saw his avatar. Then I combined that picture eith your name in RF here. The rest was a conclusion. I wrote the term in French because you call yourself Alain. It was more a question to you. Because, sure, you may argue that AP here means 'thoughts behind something' and it makes sense. But then there ist thiss picture in your avatar. What does it show in your own interpretation? Of course it's not a photo, but with a bit fantasy I saw just what I mentioned. I didnt mean that because of that pic I should insult you. Nothing negative like that. I just made a combination of your name here with the pic. That here your name means almost a holy entity, that is ok for me, because I had no criticism for it anyway. My question now remains, why you are so aggressive now. This is going into something that is completely the opposit of what you meant to me all the time. For me you were a smart commentator with big knowledge and I read you with satisfaction. But what is this now? Where did I touch you in a way that you were unable to bear? Do you want to forbid that I made such a combination? Again, that wouldnt be you, Alain.
But this here is a bit too much: You've lost your license to practice for being a complete unreasonable asshole. You use your sickness as an excuse to say the most vile things. --- What does it mean? I lost what? I use my sickness? Say what. A handicap isnt a sickness. Alain, you're completely off the road. Again, I didnt insult you. Even if I had, it wouldnt give you the right to completely lose your temper now. Proof? Read back what you've all written against Hyatt. Man, I took your own avatar on talkchess and said how I saw it. And I thought that it should be allowed to publish what I saw. But I want to ask you how you meant your message to Ed. Wsnt that a bit over the top and nasty? Excuse me, I was a bit surprised. It's just making no sense compared with all the good comments you wrote over the *years*. What is going on with you. What took you down to that irrational spot? I wished that you came back to your normal bite, Please. Perhaps this makes you laugh again: if I decided to insult you, Alain, I would never use such a short wording. If ever, I would write at least a message of three pages...
That means you need to take your medication and go lay down!
Stop sticking your nose up other peoples assholes and sniffing around- its an nasty habit.
Let's better agree to disagree. Like computerchess it's an art to diagnose intestinal cancer, and I'm, well, just call me master with my Airborne Warning System. Psycho imbalance leads to cancer. It's tough if people reject my expertise as if they could live forever.
You've had your head so far up your own ass for so long, that the only crap you see - is your own- and that expertise that you speak so highly of- has been wasted on self- diagnosing just that -crap!
Once in a while you make some viable coherent contributions!
Take your personal attacks some place else!
THe story even goes on.
I visited the neighbor forum 'Open' and read the information that the famous BB also had a prename Alain S.. So who is who? Two Alains or only one? It wouldnt surprise me at all if those who like to publish their thoughts so actively would like to be members in as many fora as possible. I can only praise Hyatt again, because he always leaves no doubt where he's writing, wither under hyatt or bob. But that is almost easy with his legendary status. In the anti-Vas campaign BB however was really one of the most sportive marathon activists. BTW I had always the impression that he left out all insulting vocabulary. But under the impression of the EC FIDE I came to the new impression that BB wasnt presenting the living conditions of a creative programmer and artist Vas with the necessary implications of giving him the chance of a doubt by the differencing intentional cheating from possible but not forced impressions. I think only expert programmers could have the experiences of such situations and having therefore possible explanations for many negligencies that surprised mainly laymen who never had been in these big shoes of inventors. From academics like Hyatt however I would always have expected that he were bound by his education and therefore avoid all evil possibilities like this awful hate campain over many years.
It can be argued- that the EC should allow for ethical precedence to supersede its own time framed regulations, when considering a case history which contains unethical conduct perpetrated upon an individual going back unabated before their own rule change- to be include as evidence.
In addition, in case Vas attempts to enter an ICGA tournament in the future and is rejected, it seems not unlikely that another complaint with the Ethics Commission would lead to a harsher sanction against the ICGA.
The only recourse FIDE has at its disposal now if the ICGA gets difficult is to break from them.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill