"Ian Shaw" <[email protected]> wrote on 29/06/2009 16:19:29:
> Indeed. The plethora of dice alternatives does not help win the > argument. Such people are unlikely to be convinced by anything, so I > wouldn't cater to their folly. I agree that manual dice should remain. I > see no need for random.org, myself, but am open to persuasion. random.org would be my first arguemnt against somebody accusing gnubg's RNG to be not fair (I mean somebody not convinced by the argument "Look at the source code"). Manual dice is second, and last. Above that I just resign and let them swim in their nonsense. MaX.
_______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
