On Tue, 30 Jun 2009 11:52:00 +0200, "h.g. muller" <[email protected]> wrote: > At 00:35 30-6-2009 -0700, Tim Mann wrote: > >Actually, looking at the recent messages, people are still coming there > >to ask about the protocol sometimes. Let's keep the group around > >and keep a link to it from whatever page(s) we end up having for engine > >authors. We should point them to the WinBoard Forum too, though, since > >that's more active. > > I think that is a very bad idea. I never visited the yahoo chess-engines > group, > and do not intend to do so in the future. I want to keep any discussion as > centralized as possible. Even if the developers would always be at both sites, > it would be very undesirable to have disjoint groups of engine authors > discussing without knowing about each other, and each other's proposals. > The usefulness of discussion grows as the square of the number of > participants. > > It seems unfair to send people to a place where their remarks and proposals > will > be utterly ignored. So I think it should be clearly specified that if they > post > something at yahoo, no one will look at it for months, while if they post > at WB > forum, they might have 24-hour service for downloading a new alpha version > implementing their suggestion. Only if every link to yahoo goes accompanied by > such a warning, I would be in favor of including such links,
Well, people have not been making proposals on that list, just asking "how do I do this?" or "what does this mean?" questions, and they usually get a quick answer from someone else on the list or from me. However, I'm fine with putting a notice on the Yahoo group that people should go to the WinBoard forum instead. I'll do that. -- Tim Mann [email protected] http://tim-mann.org/
