[Bug-gnubg] Proper Credits

[Albert Silver]

Forgive me if this goes twice, but I'm having trouble with my e-mail today, 
so I'm sending this again from my Hotmail account -->

This was posted in the GammonLine forum which I am forwarding to the mailing 
list:

Well, I don't feel like doing all of the mathematical homework for the gnu 
team, particularly given how many of my ideas and suggestions have been 
absorbed by gnu without any attribution to me whatsoever. But to reiterate, 
it is wrong to imagine that a variable stopping point, triggered by 2.33 jsd 
(or that combined with a fixed minimum number of trials), gives the same 
confidence as a 2.33 jsd result with a fixed stopping point. I ran some 
experiments and posted some of the results here earlier. Use more than 2.33.

Douglas Zare
------------------------------------------------------

In the forum I responded:

I'm sure no intention was meant to step on any toes. In the list of changes 
for example, you'll always see credit attributed to the originator of an 
idea on top of the programmer responsible for implementing it. Perhaps you 
could delineate a few of these ideas so that proper credit can be given? 
I'll forward this message to the GNUBG mailing list as this is a serious 
comment and should be addressed.

Albert

_________________________________________________________________
MSN Messenger: instale grátis e converse com seus amigos. 
http://messenger.msn.com.br