FICS - Free Internet Chess Server
8708 31ST Ave N
New Hope
Mn 55427

     Log of Town Meeting #1

Date:  Sunday, March 13th, 1999
Time:  1400 CST
Topic: General

[Start of Log]

   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): OK, the town meeting is about to start...
   :DChessmaster(2): what meeting?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Please read "help town_meeting" and I remind you that abusive tells will result in a muzzle.
   :pgv(2): without previous warning.
   :BugHolio(2): we need to stop this Join this(tourney) stuff
   :BugHolio(2): now they are trying to pull it in ch 1
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I see BugHolio has started :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, tshouts could be good
   :Bremen(2): well, we have no control over non TM's advertising
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): A policy could be implemented for cshouts
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): We are already trying to reduce mamer's cshouts.
   :BugHolio(2): most of the time one guy will shout 'join this' and then someone else wanting to get the damn thing start will join in on shouting it
   :Bremen(TM)(2): really?
   :Sybox(2): like a dog muzzle with leather
   :DChessmaster(2): what about a list like seeks but for tourneys
   :BugHolio(2): that would rule
   :Bremen(TM)(2): Dchess.. that would be "mam lt"
   :DChessmaster(2): no, i meant like seeks, u know, set seek 1/0 and all that
   :Bremen(TM)(2): ohhh...
   :BugHolio(2): like mamer seek 3 players for 3 0 SS
   :DChessmaster(2): yeah
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): That is a good idea. When ever mamer has a tourney it can post a seek ad
   :BugHolio(2): that would rule
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I must agree here :)
   :Bremen(TM)(2): the programmers may not like it :-)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Something to get DAV busy :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, in the meantime, we could see if it would be possible for TMs to get it lower, so you only have to censor mamer
   :DChessmaster(2): notes that is mamer uses seek ads, cshout could be kept for announcements....maybe even made so it is not for publix use anymore
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): lower cshouts I mean
   :DChessmaster(2): wonders what people think of making cshouts for Admins only, and people cant turn them off
   :EricT(2): that's what announcements are, isn't it?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): That is called announcements
   :DChessmaster(2): i c
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, that's all you have to say? I thought I would have a hard time trying to answer everyone at once...
   :DChessmaster(2): will try and come up with something :)
   :GreenFord(2): is there an agenda?
   :Googly(2): who notebanned fpawn?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, the topic was "general", but no agenda was set
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Let's see, I got a message on the rating system.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): But I guess that was discussed early on.
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): the chess server should unit chess players but instead keeps them private
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): What do you mean?
   :Russianbear(2): is the town meetin under way?
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): well i want to find fellow country men
   :muffin(2): what is this?
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): yes
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): A Town meeting is underway
   :muffin(2): to what end?
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): Now is the time to gripe to the (*)s
   :Russianbear(2): i think a noescape variable should be addedd
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): and make your suggestions for improvements, problems you face know to the admins
   :Googly(2):  I would lik noescape also
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): I would second the call for noescape.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Hmm, this is a chess server GreenFord :)
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): the admin know where people are from
   :Alko(2): if we're going to have a noescape var than we also should have a nolag var
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): whow do you propose noescape should work?
   :LionMan(2): i favor the nolag var  :)
   :Googly(2): if both players have noescape set to 1, then if one of them disconnects, they lose
   :Russianbear(2): the way it does on icc and chess.nert, rajiv
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): but SI surely it is not soldly about playing
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well I disconnect for a legitimate reason? Like my computer crashes or the phone disconnects?
   :muffin(2): you can do that anyway Googly, just resign your stored games
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): after all we can type :)
   :Russianbear(2): then dont set it to 1
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): well, I guess noescape could be added.
   :EricT(2): if you disconnect for a legit reason, you don't set noescape.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): and I have every intention to come back (and I do come back in the quickest posible time) -- then I loose the game
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): I don't quite like it
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): it works that way for bughouse already
   :Russianbear(2): if you have a bad connection
   :Googly(2): you can't force someone to resign their stored game, muffin
   :muffin(2): Googly, read "help resign"
   :Russianbear(2): if you have a bad connection, dont set it to 1
   :Alko(2): if both have to set it to 1 than it whats the use of it?
   :EricT(2): here's the problem with noescape:
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): yeah but I like the noescape part when I am playign someone and that person does not com back even after 1/2 hour
   :EricT(2): if you're going to disconnect on purpose, you're not going to set noescape.
   :Russianbear(2): he, who disconnects. loses, alko
   :LionMan(2): right eric
   :Sybox(2): what if you have to adjourn and hes not answering you yes or no
   :EricT(2): so if you have two players with noescape set playing each other, neither one is going to disconnect on purpose...
   :EricT(2): so all you get are disconnections by accident costing people games.
   :Alko(2): if i disconnect it means my shitty isp is down and i wont be on for the next few hours
   :Sybox(2): or suppose you disconnect and he refuses to continue when you come back
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): yeah -- while the noescape is like shotgun marriage. I understand the problem bu tI don't like the solution
   :EricT(2): the positive: if you can choose to set your formula so that you only play people who have noescape set, then you can make it so you're only playing people who won't disconnect on purpose.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): It is only an option, a feature, I see no problem with it
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well maybe we should implement a procedure where it becomes the responsibility of the person who disconnects to finish the game
   :Russianbear(2): least i  will know that if i have it set to 1 and my opponent does too, he will lose if he disconnects
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): actually, there are many times when I want to make sure I'm not playing someone with a bad connection, even.
   :LionMan(2): of course if i know me and an opponent have it set and my only move leads to a loss i could sit there and hope you disconnect and i win :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): One can have that vars in its formula even
   :Russianbear(2): yes, si
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): like if somebody disconnects and if the player does not finish the game in the next two times he/she see the opponent, the person losses the game
   :muffin(2): changes nothing: people who want to disconnect in losing positions will set noescape 0.
   :Russianbear(2): that is too complicated
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): I had suggested that there be an option whereby your clock keeps running even if you disconnect instead, but I was told that would be too difficult to implement.
   :LionMan(2): still have resume to force a game to be finished i think
   :Russianbear(2): we can call than "noresume", rajiv
   :EricT(2): yes, muffin, but if people can set their formula to play only people with noescape 1, then they won't play those people.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2):  but the noescape varible penalizes people who want to come back and finish the game
   :Russianbear(2): if you think you will disconnect, dont set it to 1
   :EricT(2): rajiv, if those people are worried about that, they can leave it set to 0, and it won't affect them (except that they'll find some people won't play them)
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): there is no way I know when I am going to disconnect. They are in effect acts of god
   :muffin(2): so those who cant set noescape 1 due to ISP problems are unfairly discriminated against??
   :EricT(2): a little bit.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): Like once we lost power here. I had no way of anticipating that
   :muffin(2): thats not nice
   :EricT(2): <nod>
   :Russianbear(2): those who have isp problem can set it to 0
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): I usually don't have ISP problem but sometimes the server crashes due to overload, or like this one power failure incident
   :EricT(2): but...some people don't like disconnections in their games, regardless of why the disconnection occurs. why should they be stuck playing people whose routes drop them often enough that they're worried about it so much that they can't set noescape 1?
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): whether you consider unfair or not (I don't) the ability to discriminate that way is exactly what I'm asking for, yes.
   :Sybox(2): what I suggested is a time limit on returning then 1-0
   :EricT(2): server crashes might be treated separately...i think on icc, noescape is ignored in a server shutdown.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well but disconnections are a part of life. I don't like death -- but it happens! So we have to deal with it in a logical manner
   :muffin(2): everyone loses connection due to router problems
   :Russianbear(2): erict is right
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): yeah but my server here shut down -- how will the chess server know that?
   :Russianbear(2): some people hate disconnections of any sort
   :EricT(2): but they are more a part of life for some than for others...and those who don't have them happen so much get to remove them from their life if they want with this variable.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): but right now disconnections happen and games get saved and loosers end  up abusing this
   :EricT(2): <shrug> on icc, i have noescape 0, but i think it's a good thing to add.
   :muffin(2): you can do that already: resign stored games
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): That folks is the problem, there fore focus on the abusive behavior and not on disconnections
   :muffin(2): so whats the point?
   :Russianbear(2): the point is, if you dont like it for any reason, set it to 0
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): no rajiv, a disconnection wrecks my concentration, I don't want to have to put up with it for any reason.
   :Russianbear(2): i bet tms would love noescapr var
   :Bremen(TM)(2): I wouldn't
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): NO - as a TM I would hate it
   :Russianbear(2): why?
   :EricT(2): <nod> removing the intentional disconnections is great (it's very difficult to catch *all* intentional disconnectors, so some will always be out there unnoticed)...and some people would want the unintentional disconnections removed from their lives too.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): most tourney players do come back and finish their games
   :EricT(2): and this lets them.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): less than 5% of the players do not come back
   :muffin(2): I submitt that those who constantly winge about having a game adjourned by disconnection value a win on a chess server too much. Otherwise they would just resign their stored games.
   :Russianbear(2): yeah, but you can have tourney where everyone should set noesc to 1, or 0
   :CanOpener(2): congrats musha
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well frankly that will not happen. Getting  a few people to do "set tourney 1" itself is such a major pain
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): now we have to tell them "set noescape 0" , set private 0, set tourney 1 ..
   :Russianbear(2): ideally, if a tourney is "noescape" , everyone should have noescape set to 1
   :muffin(2): it's just plain unreasonable
   :EricT(2): <shrug> tourney games shouldn't be any different from other games -- if both players have noescape 1, then it's a noescape game, and if not, then it's the same as always.
   :Russianbear(2): mamer code should be changed
   :Russianbear(2): mamer to implement that
   :Bremen(TM)(2): yes, many users do not understand the variables at all... adding noesc tourneys would just confuse them even more and annoy us TM's
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): and I <shrug> -- That is totally unreasonable
   :Russianbear(2): i dont know how someone may argue against noescape
   :Russianbear(2): if you dont like it, set it to 0 and shut up
   :EricT(2): <nod> if you set noescape 0, it has very very little impact in your life.
   :muffin(2): if everyone type set form noescape you have no opps!!
   :muffin(2): no impact
   :muffin(2): hahahah
   :EricT(2): that doesn't happen so much, though.
   :EricT(2): i've never run into any times when i wanted to play a game on icc and couldn't because of someone's formula?
   :Russianbear(2): if everyone will do it, it means it is a good thing to have
   :muffin(2): it is principle of that matter. why waste time implementing such things when there are more useful things to do
   :Russianbear(2): rajiv, mischannel
   :EricT(2): a lot of people like it a lot.
   :Russianbear(2): thats crap, muffin
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): yeah. I want to play someone with a noescape=1 and I cannot because of that person stupid phobia against disconnects
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): and I bet as a TM it will make my life miserable during tournies
   :muffin(2): people like to find alternative means to win a game of chess other than by playing good moves.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Why would it rajiv?
   :Russianbear(2): many people will be happy if noesc is added
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): for example when you see things go wrong private vars, tourney vars, no play lists -- tourney are stuck while those things get resolved
   :EricT(2): if lots of people turn noescape on and set formula noescape, that means lots of people like the new feature a lot and are using it. if not many people do it, it doesn't hurt anything. rajiv makes a legit point that fixing vars can be hard sometimes...
   :Russianbear(2): mamer should set variables for people , imo
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Tourneys wouldn't be stuck with noescape vars
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): now add one more to the things that can wrong in a tourney noescape var -- I will hear shouts like my opp has his escape var set to 1 and mine is 0 I cannot play what should I do
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): the tourney vars gets around formula and noplay list
   :EricT(2): <nod> superintellect.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): no I have seen tourneys many time get stuck on noplay lists
   :Russianbear(2): it should ger around censor list too
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, that's not what's in the help file :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): never happened to me
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): and I have seen tourneys as recently as last week get stuck on the private variable
   :Bremen(TM)(2): nod, I managed that
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Private is another story
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well I managed one too
   :itz(2): what it _should_ do is not to allow me to enter the tourney when there's someone i censor (and kick me out when somebody such joins.)
   :Russianbear(2): mamer should check all these things when a player joins the tourney
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): believe me noescape will be part of that same story
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): noescape won't add another problem
   :Russianbear(2): will it be implemented, superintellect?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I'll have to ask DAV.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I can't program the server myself :)
   :Russianbear(2): ok, cool :)
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well let us all hope and pray that noescape var does not see the light of the day on FICS
   :Alko(2): amen@rajiv
   :Russianbear(2): thats stupid, rajiv
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Why not? It won't affect you if you don't want it
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): It is a totally wrong solution to the problem  we are trying to solve
   :SandBager(SR)(TM)(2): Noescape is dumb
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): ok on to another issue, is there a process whereby portions of the server code might be opened to certain members in order to increase the pace of improvements?
   :Russianbear(2): whats a right solution?
   :Bremen(TM)(2): I must side with rajiv
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): What is your solution rajiv?
   :muffin(2): I agree with rajiv
   :Russianbear(2): i played 7000 games here, i am tred of people disconnecting
   :itz(2): why is the code not _all_ open? what happened to GPL?
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): the problem is loosing people disconnecting from the server
   :Russianbear(2): tired
   :Alko(2): keep it as it is is less bad than adding a noescape var
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): the onus for finishing the game must be upto the guy who disconnects
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): no it's not rajiv, the problem is I don't want to continue a game after a disconnect sometimes.
   :Russianbear(2): why. alko?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): If both want to, where it the problem?
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): place it on the disconnector and if that player does not finish the game in the next two times they are both there the player automatically forfeits
   :Russianbear(2): people who like to disconnect wont like it, of course
   :itz(2): no that's wring rajiv
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): If you don't like it, don't use it
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): the problem is that as much as I hate disconnects I know it is impposible to control them
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): right! (SI)
   :itz(2): what if i have killer lag and have to quit?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): What is wrong with adding an extra option?
   :Sybox(2): it would be the focus of another discussion
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): ok itz, then log in during the night and finish it
   :Alko(2): if both players have to set it to have any effect than both can also just agree to resign after a disconnect
   :muffin(2): I hate the inference: You don't have noescape 1 therefore you are a disconnector.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): the operating words "two times both the players are logged on"
   :itz(2): my opponent may not come, knowing that he'll win by forefit!
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well then the function of the noescape var has been served
   :Russianbear(2): you cants controll them, rajiv, dont set it to 1, but some people can control it
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): trust me russianbear even you cannot control it
   :Russianbear(2): i can 99% percent of the time
   :Bremen(TM)(2): yes, that opens up possible abuse for the person who didn't log out, Rajiv
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well what about the 1% of the time?
   :Reyn(2): the big problem with disconnects is that you can't really go too hard against them because they occur "naturally" too
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): the point is that some of us would rather not play a game if it will be interrupted.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): you ar willign to loose those game?
   :Russianbear(2): what about it?
   :Alko(2): if you want your games to be lost after you disconnect why dont you all just resign?
   :Russianbear(2): ok, ill lose
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): absolutely I am willing to lose the game!
   :Russianbear(2): nit a big deal
   :muffin(2): this has already been implemented. read "help resign"
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well what you are proposing now is that the person who disconnect looses automatically, I say give that disconnector two more chances and then setthe result
   :EricT(2): muffin, that implication doesn't end up being made, since the default is 0, so at *least* 80% of people have it set to 0.
   :Russianbear(2): the default shou.ld be 1
   :muffin(2): Russianbear just infered it
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): Give the one who disconnects a chance (2 in fact) and then let the big brother step in
   :Russianbear(2): infered what?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Actualy, I think 0 is the best.
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): rajiv, how does that eliminate the possibility of interruption?
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): that does not eliminate the possiblilty of interruption, but it also prevents shotgun results
   :Russianbear(2): you can have more than 2 values for noescape
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well why not 3? :
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): :"))
   :muffin(2): Russianbear(2): people who like to disconnect wont like it, of course
   :Reyn(2): what about this one: when you disconnect you have to finish the match within 5 times you've been on FICS with the other person, or within a week, whichever is first
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): As I said, I would rather see my opponent's clock simply continue to run (like in real chess), but barring that I want the game over, and I shouldn't have to lose it.
   :Russianbear(2): thats almost as if it was set to 0
   :Russianbear(2): you have to try to resume the adjourned game if the other person is online
   :Reyn(2): what if it's a 60 10 game and you get disconnected naturally
   :Reyn(2): the next day you go on FICS for a few quick games and then it turns out you HAVE to finish that unfinished 60 0
   :Reyn(2): uh, 60 10 :-)
   :Russianbear(2): rajiv, the way you want noesc to be omplemented is the way it is done now
   :Reyn(2): anyway, that's not exactly nice... you're forced into playing a game you may not have the time to play at that moment
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): no it is not done now like that.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): right now it has to goto adjudicate etc.. and blah balh
   :Russianbear(2): forced?
   :Russianbear(2): if you are weak enough to be forced, you should lose the game if you disconnect
   :Reyn(2): well, "play or lose" is what I'd call pretty much forced
   :Russianbear(2): dont play the game if you dont have time
   :Russianbear(2): you wont leave in the middle of otb game
   :Russianbear(2): why should it happen on fics?
   :itz(2): you don't have lag in OTB either, why should it be on FICS?
   :muffin(2): i get up and go to the toilet in an OTB game
   :Russianbear(2): it is a bad argument, itz
   :Russianbear(2): you can go to the toilet, muffin
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): Perhaps this would be an easier question to have answered (since I don't think we're going to settle anything through discussion on this one).  Could the admins commit to making a decision on noescape within a certain time frame and posting a news item?
   :muffin(2): thanks!
   :Russianbear(2): it is not notoilet variable
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): need some fruit muffin?
   :muffin(2): hm?
   :Russianbear(2): superintellect said he will talk to dav, ezekla
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): I guess I'm too late with that question, have the admins all stopped listening? (I know I was about to.)
   :Reyn(2): what about a "phone" command that adjourns the game for say 5 minutes? (only in games longer than an hour ofcourse)
   :Russianbear(2): dav = the main programmer  of fics
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well folks I guess I need to leave now. WEll hope you see my concerns int he proper light.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): No real desisions come out of this, just ideas.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): It may or may not be implemented.
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): I understand teh problem but feel we sould not jump to a solutin without thinking it thru
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): yes, I like to get a guarantee on a response and maybe a time frame.
   :Russianbear(2): whats your solution, rajiv?
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): I think I told it a few times.
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): this is important enough to me to affect my decision on where to play.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Oh, I'll guaranty an answer alright
   :Russianbear(2): your solution is the way it is done now
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): ok, thanks SI!
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): Instead of giving the forfiet at the disconnect, give it after both the players are there simultaneously on the server twice and don't finish the game
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): after two chances penalize the disconnector
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): well I am out of here
   :rajiv(SR)(TM)(2): message me if you want to discuss more of this
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): every internet-geek-chessplayer should have a hobby :)
   :MAdBorg(2): I thought playing chess over the internet was a hobby..... ;o)
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): yes, let's move on.
   :Russianbear(2): superintellect, are you there?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Is that all about the noescape vars?
   :GreenFord(TM)(2): what's next Esekla?
   :Russianbear(2): i have one more point
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, go ahead :)
   :Russianbear(2): if both me and my player have noesc =1, and he disconnects after 2 or 3 moves, it still should be counted as a loss
   :Russianbear(2): in other words
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): You mean that it would get around the abort feature?
   :Russianbear(2): yes, it should work from move 1
   :Russianbear(2): or move 2
   :Russianbear(2): but no later than that
   :Russianbear(2): many people lose a piece in 3 moves and disconnect in 1 0
   :CanOpener(2): join #7 5 0 blitz
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): next issue?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, what's next? :)
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): Well, I'd like to here ideas for merging the power of the Open Source model with the need to protect our code from competitors.
   :Russianbear(2): lets talk about mamer
   :Russianbear(2): competitors?
   :Esekla(SR)(TM)(2): (hear)
   :Russianbear(2): who are they?
   :Russianbear(2): mews?
   :Russianbear(2): mewis?
   :Sybox(2): are there any plans to have an interface like blitzin for fics to attract new members
   :Russianbear(2): good q, sybox?
   :Russianbear(2): disredard that ?
   :Russianbear(2): i heard admins would sponsor a contest
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, some ppl are working on an interface.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): JAVA and non-JAVA
   :Russianbear(2): who are these people?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): So I've heard to Russianbear.
   :muffin(2): CDay, AndreD
   :Russianbear(2): will it happen?
   :Sybox(2): the smoking man from the x-files knows
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): too
   :muffin(2): CDay is Java guru
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Last time I checked it was still in the organization stage
   :Sybox(2): I think it will be cool when we do
   :Russianbear(2): i heard admins would give a sum of money to the author of the contest winning interface
   :Russianbear(2): ok
   :Sybox(2): Well we should let the users decide since theyre the one who be connecting to fics
   :Russianbear(2): someone should just hack blitzin
   :Sybox(2): then they get sued
   :Russianbear(2): i am not sure if it is possible, though
   :muffin(2): hack blitzin?!
   :Russianbear(2): yes
   :Russianbear(2): is it possible?
   :muffin(2): protocol different
   :Russianbear(2): you mean timestamp?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): The server-interface communication is different I think
   :Russianbear(2): the commands are almost the same
   :Russianbear(2): oh well
   :Russianbear(2): cclient and winboard are almost as good as blitz in anyway
   :Thalium(C)(2): winboard is better
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): There is a need for an interface, that's for sure
   :Thalium(C)(2): particularly if you are interfacing a computer account to fics
   :Russianbear(2): do you think so, si?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Well, I've never a good one IMHO :)
   :JamesBaud(2): winboard kind of sucks for interfacing a computer to fics
   :Thalium(C)(2): what do you mean James it is idiot proof
   :Russianbear(2): did you use winboard or cclient, si?
   :Loomis(2): CClient is the greatest
   :JamesBaud(2): thalium: what if you wanted to play crazyhouse and blitz with this computer?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): All that I know, cc, winb, mac interfaces...
   :JamesBaud(2): winboard offers no way to distinguish between the two
   :Thalium(C)(2): that has little to do with the interface...that is a function of the engine
   :Russianbear(2): is blitzin or good in your opinion?
   :JamesBaud(2): no it is not
   :Sybox(2): I think blitzin rocks
   :Thalium(C)(2): sure it does if you turn off the check legality of moves thing
   :JamesBaud(2): the game starts, winboard does not inform the engine if its crazyhouse or blitz.  the starting position is the same
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I said, nothing meants my standards; I know they are high however :)
   :Thalium(C)(2): i wouldn/t know about that
   :JamesBaud(2): winboard passes the time control, name of players, and rating of players, and whether the opponent is a computer
   :Russianbear(2): superintellect should write an interface
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): He's trying to Russianbear :)
   :Thalium(C)(2): perhaps the next version then
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I can't live up to my standards... :)
   :Bremen(TM)(2): hmm.. If you write an interface please make it TM friendly :-)
   :Russianbear(2): isnt it for mac, si?
   :Sybox(2): and make the board cool not dorky
   :JamesBaud(2): hi inno :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Yeah, but can be made for PC in no time once I finished it
   :Russianbear(2): cool
   :Thalium(C)(2): what do you want Sybox...a naked piece set?:)
   :JamesBaud(2): the real problem with winboard is it is made for people to play ches with too.  would be nice to have a 'robofics' for windozw
   :Thalium(C)(2): agreed robofics is best....if you have the OS that is
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I've heard that there was an attempt to bring programmers together to try to make a "big" interface.
   :Russianbear(2): is robofics better than winboard for connectin a comp to fics?
   :Thalium(C)(2): sure
   :JamesBaud(2): heh, big interface is bad
   :Russianbear(2): that would be cool, si
   :Sybox(2): yeah
   :JamesBaud(2): i wanna little interface
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Yeah, but that will take a miracle to happen though :)
   :sdfsg(U)(2): robofics rules for a computer/fics interface
   :JamesBaud(2): slics has most everthing i want, exept the telnet window sucks
   :Loomis(2): CClient is the greatest
   :Russianbear(2): slics isnt any good, imo
   :JamesBaud(2): cclient is weird, its ok
   :sdfsg(U)(2): slics is a pain
   :Sybox(2): slics is the interface by d fong?
   :Loomis(2): CClient is the greatest
   :Russianbear(2): yes
   :JamesBaud(2): yes
   :Russianbear(2): yes, sybox, i mean
   :JamesBaud(2): slics takes a lot of configuring, but now that its configured, its great
   :Sybox(2): I agree about the telnet window, you have to pay fong $12 to get a nicer version of slics?
   :muffin(2): telnet window is fine
   :sdfsg(U)(2): I think you only get another set of pieces
   :Russianbear(2): but does the telnet window still suck in the nicer version?
   :muffin(2): what does you mean suck?
   :Russianbear(2): i think it does
   :sdfsg(U)(2): me too
   :Buri(FM)(2): what wrong with telnet window i ask
   :Russianbear(2): suck = no colors for tells, ctells, shouts, etc
   :muffin(2): it is fine
   :Fredde(2): That you can only go one or two pages up ...
   :JamesBaud(2): also the local line editing is a little buggy
   :sdfsg(U)(2): uggly - screw up the reading and typing - winboard has a nice telnet window
   :Fredde(2): I.e. you acn't follow a longer discussion with slics because it has a short screnn to go back on
   :JamesBaud(2): you can set the buffer i think fredde
   :Fredde(2): How?
   :muffin(2): how?
   :JamesBaud(2): i havent tried
   :Buri(FM)(2): in the newest version of slics the chat window is gone withs is good
   :Russianbear(2): can you cut and paste in slics?
   :JamesBaud(2): yes
   :Russianbear(2): how?
   :JamesBaud(2): select, ctrl insert, shift insert
   :Fredde(2): Not with the earlier versions at least ... you can paste but not cut
   :JamesBaud(2): normal windows cut/paste
   :muffin(2): it follow X windows conventions
   :Russianbear(2): what about sopy?
   :JamesBaud(2): ctrl-insert is a windows hotkey
   :Russianbear(2): copy
   :JamesBaud(2): for copy
   :muffin(2): it follows X windows conventions
   :Russianbear(2): ok
   :Buri(FM)(2): you put noxcutpaste=1 in chessbd ini and you copy and paste
   :JamesBaud(2): you can copy and paste by default buri
   :JamesBaud(2): Buri(FM)(2): you put noxcutpaste=1 in chessbd ini and you copy and paste
   :JamesBaud(2): see?
   :sdfsg(U)(2): mark stuff with left button and paste with right?  been ages since I used X
   :Buri(FM)(2): ok i know one way that is good
   :Fredde(2): Thanks for that copy and paste thing James ... and works
   :muffin(2): oooh Option icstrust is a nice variable
   :JamesBaud(2): welcome... i dont see an option for buffer size though :(
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): OK, anything else? :)
   :Sybox(2): do you think we should have a monthly standard championship on fics of say 15.0 or 25.0?
   :muffin(2): JamesBaud have a look at the var mrows
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Hmm, those kind of events can be arranged Sybox
   :JamesBaud(2): mrows is not listed here
   :muffin(2): in on 2.5p
   :muffin(2): you?
   :itz(2): why? there is already the 45 5 weakly mamer tourney?
   :JamesBaud(2): 2.5k
   :itz(2): weekly, of course
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): There are some of these (like 20 5 and 15 0) already yeah.
   :Sybox(2): I mean a knockout avent probably between the best Fics Standard Players
   :JamesBaud(2): knockout sucks
   :itz(2): so why don't the Bset Players join the mamer tourney?
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): For events like that, you can ask a TM to organize one for you.
   :itz(2): and Swiss is basically knockout with consolation games for losers.
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): I can forward it to the TM list to ask if someone would be willing.
   :JamesBaud(2): knockout determines #1, swiss determines more than #!
   :Thalium(C)(2): make my human a TM and i'll do it :)
   :JamesBaud(2): plus with draws, i dont know how well a straight knockout tourn would work
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): "help mamer_tm" Thalium
   :Sybox(2): Any suggestions on how to make the standards more compeitive or increase participation?
   :Buri(FM)(2): does winbord and cclient save all your games
   :JamesBaud(2): heh, entrace fee + money for winning ;)
   :itz(2): do that and i'll never play again
   :JamesBaud(2): haha
   :Bremen(TM)(2): well I think that many times people don't know about standard tourneys... last week I got 16 for a 30 0, just by cshouting it a few times... and giving plenty of advance warning
   :Sybox(2): forget it you make a money tournament and every crafty in the Universe will desecend on fics with a thud
   :JamesBaud(2): yeah, thats what sucks
   :Thalium(C)(2): how many craftys are there in the universe ? :)
   :JamesBaud(2): they were having problems with that at the computer chess championship
   :Sybox(2): why is it too strong?
   :JamesBaud(2): naw
   :JamesBaud(2): a number of programs are stronger, but anybody can compile crafty and say "i wrote it"
   :JamesBaud(2): or more common, make tiny changes, compile it and say "I wrote it"
   :muffin(2): I wrote it!
   :sdfsg(U)(2): .. but if it is then better, then apparently you came up with something good
   :sdfsg(U)(2): no need for you to write something entirely from scratch
   :muffin(2): yes
   :muffin(2): there is need
   :Thalium(C)(2): there is if you want to enter it the the computer chess championships
   :Sybox(2): what I did suggest is that for big Tournaments that there be section reserved for strong Player who are at least 1800+ strength
   :Thalium(C)(2): i think that would be reasonable
   :sdfsg(U)(2): all computer chess programmers borrow ideas/code
   :sdfsg(U)(2): big deal.. it's the tiny details that matter
   :Thalium(C)(2): particularly the 5 0 nightly which routinely gets 30 or so players
   :Thalium(C)(2): with like 8 over 1800 and the rest just get crushed :)
   :sdfsg(U)(2): the skeleton of the program is mostly the same
   :Sybox(2): like could you see a 2350 rated Player playing a 1500 for 60 minutes?
   :Bremen(TM)(2): but the 5 0 has not been getting many strong players of late, so a 1800 section would be worthless
   :Thalium(C)(2): but i think that is what is keeping them away Bremen...i know it sometimes keeps me away and i am 1950
   :Bremen(TM)(2): so its a self feeding cycle
   :Thalium(C)(2): sometimes i just don't want to have to crush 2 or 3 players before i get to someone within 200 points
   :Sybox(2): I suppose for the weaker player he gains experince
   :JamesBaud(2): heh, but let me tell you, being 1200 and getting second in a tourney where average rating is 1850, THAT rules :)
   :Thalium(C)(2): i am not sure a 1400 gets anything out of losing in 15 moves...
   :Sybox(2): yeah and the 1200 rolls over 4 Players with ratings of 2100,2000 and 1950
   :Thalium(C)(2): absolutely sucks for the class D players too
   :Bremen(TM)(2): so we need more depth in tourneys?  well that can't happen unless more people join...
   :Sybox(2): the majority of players seem to pefer 3.0
   :JamesBaud(2): 3 0 zh rules :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Anything else?
   :Thalium(C)(2): we need a noescape variable :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Let's see, we had discussion about rating, noescape vars, interfaces, tourneys...
   :Thalium(C)(2): hehe...i was just jerking you around :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): :)
   :SuperIntellect(*)(2): Anything else, or should I call it off?
   :TownMeetings(*)(2): Meeting #1 is now over. Thank you for your participation guys!

[End of Log]

See Also:  meeting_1_followup  meeting_1_short  meetings_index  town_meetings

[Composed: March 13, 1999 -- SuperIntellect]

Login Now | Register | Download | Teaching Ladder | Events | Sponsors | Contact us | Links
Last modified: Sun Feb 11 14:27:58 GMT Standard Time 2007