CCC Forum vs Hiarcs Headbangers Game Notice

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Christopher Conkie
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:46 pm

Post by Christopher Conkie »

So you cannot do this....

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 21&t=28979

....even privately?

I guess we know who is hiding stuff if you can't.

As to the neutral party...I say it again.....you can have one if you want but they will not be accessing our analysis until the end of the game when everyone can.
User avatar
turbojuice1122
Senior Member
Posts: 2315
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:11 pm

Post by turbojuice1122 »

Christopher,

Why do you have this big problem with a neutral party having access to the analysis threads to make sure that nothing untoward is going on? I have already explained in detail why this is necessary, so Secret Seven team members saying that they don't understand the reason for it is unacceptable--they can read. There are many other reasons that I did not list as to why it's necessary, but let's just start with the ones that I did list: sharing of team member names being insufficient (for reasons I already stated), the settling of conflicts during the game (information concerning which are often in the secret threads), and team members trying to sabotage the game, particularly ones who join late (again, it would be incredibly gullible to believe that everyone on your team is giving their real names, and the same is true for us). The use of a neutral referee for this purpose is quite standard practice in these types of games (just not with match with the Rybka Forum), and it is a very simple acceptance of terms. You already accepted the terms that were proposed--it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee, and that involves having access to all analysis threads. Thus, summarizing, the very simply question is...why don't you want there to be a neutral referee with access to all analysis threads?
Christopher Conkie
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:46 pm

Post by Christopher Conkie »

turbojuice1122 wrote:Christopher,

Why do you have this big problem with a neutral party having access to the analysis threads to make sure that nothing untoward is going on? I have already explained in detail why this is necessary, so Secret Seven team members saying that they don't understand the reason for it is unacceptable--they can read. There are many other reasons that I did not list as to why it's necessary, but let's just start with the ones that I did list: sharing of team member names being insufficient (for reasons I already stated), the settling of conflicts during the game (information concerning which are often in the secret threads), and team members trying to sabotage the game, particularly ones who join late (again, it would be incredibly gullible to believe that everyone on your team is giving their real names, and the same is true for us). The use of a neutral referee for this purpose is quite standard practice in these types of games (just not with match with the Rybka Forum), and it is a very simple acceptance of terms. You already accepted the terms that were proposed--it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee, and that involves having access to all analysis threads. Thus, summarizing, the very simply question is...why don't you want there to be a neutral referee with access to all analysis threads?
They are just going to have to back down. If they don't want to, they can resign.

Let me tell you a little secret...ok?

Exactachess is the only computer chess forum where everyone must use their real name or they don't get in. Just because this place cannot control it's membership is not my problem.

If they worry here about late arriving team members then they should fix it at the number they have now and so would we.
it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee
It's not my fault. It is the person who made the challenges' fault. They did not specify that. We understand the concept of a referee who adjudicates the timing of moves. How the moves are arrived at, they do not need to know.

Sounds a bit like they are worried they will lose here.

Can you smell fear?
User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Site Admin
Posts: 6079
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Post by Harvey Williamson »

Christopher Conkie wrote:
turbojuice1122 wrote:Christopher,

Why do you have this big problem with a neutral party having access to the analysis threads to make sure that nothing untoward is going on? I have already explained in detail why this is necessary, so Secret Seven team members saying that they don't understand the reason for it is unacceptable--they can read. There are many other reasons that I did not list as to why it's necessary, but let's just start with the ones that I did list: sharing of team member names being insufficient (for reasons I already stated), the settling of conflicts during the game (information concerning which are often in the secret threads), and team members trying to sabotage the game, particularly ones who join late (again, it would be incredibly gullible to believe that everyone on your team is giving their real names, and the same is true for us). The use of a neutral referee for this purpose is quite standard practice in these types of games (just not with match with the Rybka Forum), and it is a very simple acceptance of terms. You already accepted the terms that were proposed--it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee, and that involves having access to all analysis threads. Thus, summarizing, the very simply question is...why don't you want there to be a neutral referee with access to all analysis threads?
They are just going to have to back down. If they don't want to, they can resign.

Let me tell you a little secret...ok?

Exactachess is the only computer chess forum where everyone must use their real name or they don't get in. Just because this place cannot control it's membership is not my problem.

If they worry here about late arriving team members then they should fix it at the number they have now and so would we.
it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee
It's not my fault. It is the person who made the challenges' fault. They did not specify that. We understand the concept of a referee who adjudicates the timing of moves. How the moves are arrived at, they do not need to know.

Sounds a bit like they are worried they will lose here.

Can you smell fear?
I can not be bothered reading all this but we challenged CCC not your forum Chris.
Christopher Conkie
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:46 pm

Post by Christopher Conkie »

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Christopher Conkie wrote:
turbojuice1122 wrote:Christopher,

Why do you have this big problem with a neutral party having access to the analysis threads to make sure that nothing untoward is going on? I have already explained in detail why this is necessary, so Secret Seven team members saying that they don't understand the reason for it is unacceptable--they can read. There are many other reasons that I did not list as to why it's necessary, but let's just start with the ones that I did list: sharing of team member names being insufficient (for reasons I already stated), the settling of conflicts during the game (information concerning which are often in the secret threads), and team members trying to sabotage the game, particularly ones who join late (again, it would be incredibly gullible to believe that everyone on your team is giving their real names, and the same is true for us). The use of a neutral referee for this purpose is quite standard practice in these types of games (just not with match with the Rybka Forum), and it is a very simple acceptance of terms. You already accepted the terms that were proposed--it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee, and that involves having access to all analysis threads. Thus, summarizing, the very simply question is...why don't you want there to be a neutral referee with access to all analysis threads?
They are just going to have to back down. If they don't want to, they can resign.

Let me tell you a little secret...ok?

Exactachess is the only computer chess forum where everyone must use their real name or they don't get in. Just because this place cannot control it's membership is not my problem.

If they worry here about late arriving team members then they should fix it at the number they have now and so would we.
it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee
It's not my fault. It is the person who made the challenges' fault. They did not specify that. We understand the concept of a referee who adjudicates the timing of moves. How the moves are arrived at, they do not need to know.

Sounds a bit like they are worried they will lose here.

Can you smell fear?
I can not be bothered reading all this but we challenged CCC not your forum Chris.
Noone from my forum is playing. The people who are playing are all members of the CCC/CTF and they have only been set up with a hidden facility for analysis during the game. Like you have one here.

The only members of the hidden forum we have are the people who are playing. The rest of the Exactachess membership cannot even see the forum. We will unhide it after the game. If you don't run away first that is.....
User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Site Admin
Posts: 6079
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:57 am
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Post by Harvey Williamson »

Christopher Conkie wrote:
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Christopher Conkie wrote:
turbojuice1122 wrote:Christopher,

Why do you have this big problem with a neutral party having access to the analysis threads to make sure that nothing untoward is going on? I have already explained in detail why this is necessary, so Secret Seven team members saying that they don't understand the reason for it is unacceptable--they can read. There are many other reasons that I did not list as to why it's necessary, but let's just start with the ones that I did list: sharing of team member names being insufficient (for reasons I already stated), the settling of conflicts during the game (information concerning which are often in the secret threads), and team members trying to sabotage the game, particularly ones who join late (again, it would be incredibly gullible to believe that everyone on your team is giving their real names, and the same is true for us). The use of a neutral referee for this purpose is quite standard practice in these types of games (just not with match with the Rybka Forum), and it is a very simple acceptance of terms. You already accepted the terms that were proposed--it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee, and that involves having access to all analysis threads. Thus, summarizing, the very simply question is...why don't you want there to be a neutral referee with access to all analysis threads?
They are just going to have to back down. If they don't want to, they can resign.

Let me tell you a little secret...ok?

Exactachess is the only computer chess forum where everyone must use their real name or they don't get in. Just because this place cannot control it's membership is not my problem.

If they worry here about late arriving team members then they should fix it at the number they have now and so would we.
it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee
It's not my fault. It is the person who made the challenges' fault. They did not specify that. We understand the concept of a referee who adjudicates the timing of moves. How the moves are arrived at, they do not need to know.

Sounds a bit like they are worried they will lose here.

Can you smell fear?
I can not be bothered reading all this but we challenged CCC not your forum Chris.
Noone from my forum is playing. The people who are playing are all members of the CCC/CTF and they have only been set up with a hidden facility for analysis during the game. Like you have one here.

The only members of the hidden forum we have are the people who are playing. The rest of the Exactachess membership cannot even see the forum. We will unhide it after the game. If you don't run away first that is.....
And where is the link for CCC members to join your team?
User avatar
turbojuice1122
Senior Member
Posts: 2315
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 9:11 pm

Post by turbojuice1122 »

Christopher Conkie wrote:
turbojuice1122 wrote:Christopher,

....Thus, summarizing, the very simply question is...why don't you want there to be a neutral referee with access to all analysis threads?
They are just going to have to back down. If they don't want to, they can resign.

Let me tell you a little secret...ok?

Exactachess is the only computer chess forum where everyone must use their real name or they don't get in. Just because this place cannot control it's membership is not my problem.

If they worry here about late arriving team members then they should fix it at the number they have now and so would we.
it's nobody's fault but your own if you didn't make the simple connection that a neutral referee must be able to...well...referee
It's not my fault. It is the person who made the challenges' fault. They did not specify that. We understand the concept of a referee who adjudicates the timing of moves. How the moves are arrived at, they do not need to know.

Sounds a bit like they are worried they will lose here.

Can you smell fear?
You "forgot" to answer the most important question:
turbojuice1122 wrote:Thus, summarizing, the very simply question is...why don't you want there to be a neutral referee with access to all analysis threads?
As for the statement about it being the fault of the person making the challenge, you're wrong. If you did not understand the job of a neutral referee, then you should have asked before accepting the challenge and conditions--but I think that this is quite obvious: they need to make sure of many things, not the least being that someone on one team is using a fake name and is actually on the other team. Anyone can make up a first and last name.

We are not afraid, and as you would notice eventually on what is currently our secret thread, we had been quite excited about getting this game started before this incident about the referee not being allowed to see the analysis threads of both teams.
JEB_Tucson
Senior Member
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:16 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Post by JEB_Tucson »

Christopher

The Headbangers Team is voting on whether to continue with the game if there is no neutral party. Our vote will run for no more than 48 hours.

Please follow up with your team on the issue with the names and let us know as soon as you can.

Thanks
James
Christopher Conkie
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:46 pm

Post by Christopher Conkie »

JEB_Tucson wrote:Christopher

The Headbangers Team is voting on whether to continue with the game if there is no neutral party. Our vote will run for no more than 48 hours.

Please follow up with your team on the issue with the names and let us know as soon as you can.

Thanks
James
We have told you the names of our team James.

Christopher Conkie
Henrik Dinesen
Andranik Khachatryan
Sam Hamilton
Charles Roberson
Gerold Daniels
Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman

These are the only ones who can access our fine analysis thread.

The less fine stuff will take place in the CCC where our moves will also be declared by consensus.
JEB_Tucson
Senior Member
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:16 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Post by JEB_Tucson »

Hi Christopher

This is the best I can do. If it is not acceptable with you then you need to cancel the game. I added the names of players that have posted their names in this forum.

Headbangers Team Members
Auryn, Eros Ricco
DarienSar
Dark Horse
Harvey Williamson
Highendman
Michael Blake
NATIONAL12, Paul Watson
overtond, David Overton
rhombus
Sebastian Boehme
Soren Riis
Strength
The Wizard
Tony Hedlund
turbojuice1122
Watchman, Ron Osborne
JEB_Tucson, James Biggers
Christopher Conkie
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:46 pm

Post by Christopher Conkie »

JEB_Tucson wrote:Hi Christopher

This is the best I can do. If it is not acceptable with you then you need to cancel the game. I added the names of players that have posted their names in this forum.

Headbangers Team Members
Auryn, Eros Ricco
DarienSar
Dark Horse
Harvey Williamson
Highendman
Michael Blake
NATIONAL12, Paul Watson
overtond, David Overton
rhombus
Sebastian Boehme
Soren Riis
Strength
The Wizard
Tony Hedlund
turbojuice1122
Watchman, Ron Osborne
JEB_Tucson, James Biggers
If you cannot tell us somehow.......you need to resign.

We have been very transparent with you.

You don't need to tell me about Turbo anyway.
Christopher Conkie
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:46 pm

Post by Christopher Conkie »

Christopher Conkie wrote:
JEB_Tucson wrote:Hi Christopher

This is the best I can do. If it is not acceptable with you then you need to cancel the game. I added the names of players that have posted their names in this forum.

Headbangers Team Members
Auryn, Eros Ricco
DarienSar
Dark Horse
Harvey Williamson
Highendman
Michael Blake
NATIONAL12, Paul Watson
overtond, David Overton
rhombus
Sebastian Boehme
Soren Riis
Strength
The Wizard
Tony Hedlund
turbojuice1122
Watchman, Ron Osborne
JEB_Tucson, James Biggers
If you cannot tell us somehow.......you need to resign.

We have been very transparent with you.

You don't need to tell me about Turbo anyway.
We have a new member of our team.

Zach Wegner.
JEB_Tucson
Senior Member
Posts: 3072
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:16 pm
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Post by JEB_Tucson »

Christopher Conkie wrote:
JEB_Tucson wrote:Hi Christopher

This is the best I can do. If it is not acceptable with you then you need to cancel the game. I added the names of players that have posted their names in this forum.

Headbangers Team Members
Auryn, Eros Ricco
DarienSar
Dark Horse
Harvey Williamson
Highendman
Michael Blake
NATIONAL12, Paul Watson
overtond, David Overton
rhombus
Sebastian Boehme
Soren Riis
Strength
The Wizard
Tony Hedlund
turbojuice1122
Watchman, Ron Osborne
JEB_Tucson, James Biggers
If you cannot tell us somehow.......you need to resign.

We have been very transparent with you.

You don't need to tell me about Turbo anyway.

Well Christopher, I am tired of playing games with you.
You did not accept our list of names, which by the way, we never said we would give you. So the game is canceled. You can go and crawl back under the rock that you came from. I hope that you are not representative of the people at CCC. If you are then I want nothing to do with that forum.
I guess I should have seen this coming when you started insluting the neutral party, Steve B, a CCC Forum moderator. Slimeballs like youself could learn a lot from Steve.

So good riddance Christopher, I hope we never meet again.
James
Christopher Conkie
Member
Posts: 144
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 4:46 pm

Post by Christopher Conkie »

JEB_Tucson wrote:
Christopher Conkie wrote:
JEB_Tucson wrote:Hi Christopher

This is the best I can do. If it is not acceptable with you then you need to cancel the game. I added the names of players that have posted their names in this forum.

Headbangers Team Members
Auryn, Eros Ricco
DarienSar
Dark Horse
Harvey Williamson
Highendman
Michael Blake
NATIONAL12, Paul Watson
overtond, David Overton
rhombus
Sebastian Boehme
Soren Riis
Strength
The Wizard
Tony Hedlund
turbojuice1122
Watchman, Ron Osborne
JEB_Tucson, James Biggers
If you cannot tell us somehow.......you need to resign.

We have been very transparent with you.

You don't need to tell me about Turbo anyway.

Well Christopher, I am tired of playing games with you.
You did not accept our list of names, which by the way, we never said we would give you. So the game is canceled. You can go and crawl back under the rock that you came from. I hope that you are not representative of the people at CCC. If you are then I want nothing to do with that forum.
I guess I should have seen this coming when you started insluting the neutral party, Steve B, a CCC Forum moderator. Slimeballs like youself could learn a lot from Steve.

So good riddance Christopher, I hope we never meet again.
James
You know nothing about me.......

I know about YOU.

We accept your resignation.

And as for Steve....tell him......good luck with IP's.
User avatar
mclane
Senior Member
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:04 am
Location: Luenen, germany, US of europe
Contact:

Post by mclane »

guys. its only a game of chess.

a GAME !!!!


why do you take it as serious as if would be a war ?
What seems like a fairy tale today may be reality tomorrow.
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....
Locked