Wisdom is knowing how

   little we know -- Socrates

About Company

Started in 1980, retired in 2004 REBEL was baptized into ProDeo, latin for gratis according to Dutch tradition.

Other Information

 

   Rybka-ICGA fiasco

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

    External links

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

          Correspondence regarding Rajlich' refused request for an appeal

 

 

After the publication of the contra investigation in September 2012 (on which the ICGA refused to comment despite various reminders) even more counter evidence was gathered that it's (in our humble opinion) beyond reasonable doubt the ICGA conclusions of 2011 were wrong.

 

After a year of silence we concluded that the ICGA had no intention to respond to our reasonable requests to have a look at the document plus the fact that with the new evidences our case had become even more stronger we felt it was high time for ask for Rajlich' right for an appeal.

 

As such Ed Schröder (speaking in Rajlich' name by the authority given to Schröder by Rajlich early 2012 as his legal representative) contacted the ICGA. The short version.

__________________________________________________________________________

 

From: Ed Schroder 

Subject: RE: Rybka and the ICGA
Cc: Jaap van den Herik
, David Levy

Date: August 24, 2013

 

Good morning Jaap and David,

Looking at Mark's patronizing comments I (perhaps) wasn't clear enough so allow me to be more attentively.

http://www.top-5000.nl/Rybka%20Reloaded.pdf

This is the document I both mailed you about 10-11 months ago. It's the hard work of a handful of intelligent chess programmers over a period of 15 months quickly labelled by Mark as "rhetoric", an empty and meaningless word since the word itself doesn't contain any content and as such is an insult to the intelligence to the composers of the document.

It's my hope you won't do the same thing.

Also let it be known that I have been given "carte blanche" by Vasik to speak on his behalf. And as such he wants to exercise his right to a full appeal of the Rybka-Fruit case.

So I want to ask you to set a date for the appeal.

Regards,

Ed

___________________________________________________________

 

Date: Sat, 24 Aug 2013 01:04:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Levy

Subject: Re: Rybka and the ICGA
Cc: Jaap van den Herik

 

Dear Ed,

Vas has no right to appeal at this stage, having refused all of our invitations to defend himself.

I have nothing more to say on the matter.

Kind regards,

David

___________________________________________________________

 

Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2013 08:47:06 -0700 (PDT)
From:
Vasik Rajlich
Subject:
Rybka-ICGA appeal
To: David Levy
Cc: Ed Schroder, Soren Riis

 

David,

I confirm that I appoint Ed Schroeder as my representative in the request to appeal submitted to the ICGA. I assert I have the right to appeal and the right to be represented at that appeal.

Best regards,

 

Vas

___________________________________________________________

 

Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 03:25:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Levy 

Subject: Re: Rybka-ICGA appeal
To: Vasik Rajlich  
Cc: Ed Schroder, Soren Riis


Vas,

As you well know, you were invited before the investigation began, and at every significant stage of the investigation process, to defend yourself against the allegations and the evidence that was presented against you, but in response to each of the ICGA's invitations you declined to do so, usually by simply not responding to the invitations.

The ICGA's invitations even included offering you the right to be part of the investigation panel.

The ICGA will therefore not entertain any appeal by you or anyone representing you.

Best regards,

David

__________________________________________________________

 

Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2013 13:44
From: Ed Schroder
Subject: Re: Rybka and the ICGA
To: David Levy 
Cc: Vasik Rajlich, Soren Riis

 

David,

You know (or should know that from the FIDE complaint) that is not true. We know it from your own correspondence with Vasik. Let me quote from my introduction page:
http://www.top-5000.nl/rybka.htm


 

Now 2 years after the ICGA verdict
where do we stand ?

1. An untruth first.

From the ICGA
press release

During the course of the investigation and upon presentation of the Secretariat's report Vasik Rajlich did not offer, despite repeated invitations from the ICGA to do so, any kind of defence to the allegations, or to the evidence, or to the Secretariat's report

This is a discrepancy as to facts as the ICGA fails to mention that Vasik Rajlich was denied proper preparation time to defend himself against the charges. From the
correspondence

From: Vasik Rajlich
Subject: Re: Open letter to the ICGA about the Rybka-Fruit issue
To: "David Levy"
Cc: "Larry Kaufman"
Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2011, 7:21 AM

Hi David,

I prefer to plead my case with the final arbiter rather than with the accusers. (1a)

Re. the schedule - could we have the final hearings in October or November? I'd like to prepare properly, and my schedule is very full until the first week in  October. (1b)

Best regards,
Vas

1a. Rajlich signed for the rules of the ICGA (in the 2006-2010 period) to show the source code in a trusted environment in case of doubt. He did not sign for the new 2011 rule of a public trial in order (using the words of David Levy) "who will be named and shamed on the Internet". Reminding the ICGA to its own rules apparently did not impress David Levy (in fact the ICGA never asked Rajlich for his source code) and the investigation started without Rajlich.

1b The complexity of this case is demonstrated by the two Rybka investigators who needed 1-1½ years to compile the charges against Rybka and the contra investigation that took about the same time. Given the complexity and importance of getting things right, it was very reasonable to grant Rajlich a couple of months of his spare time to prepare and defend himself to the charges.  However the right of a proper defense was (also) denied to Rajlich and the investigation started without him.

2. Vasik Rajlich author of Rybka filed a complaint to the FIDE Ethics Commission.

3. Rajlich asked the ICGA for an appeal which was denied
to him (this page).

4. In return Rajlich contributed a supplement to FIDE regarding the ICGA denial of his rightful appeal.

5. Refutation (contributed to
ChessVibes) on an ICGA document of 2013 rehashing its (old) arguments.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

David, in your email of March 2, 2011 you made a comparison with a real life court case, you said, "The nearest analogy I can think of to the process that has now started is a trial in a court of law..........."

As such an appeal is a standard ingredient of the process you started.

Something else, your persistent refusal for an appeal makes me a bit suspicious that in the meantime you have understood the case against Rybka is not so strong as you first thought and you were sucked into a process you didn't fully understand relying on the expertise of people who themselves did this for the first time and underestimated the complexity, everybody of us started as layman, that includes Watkins and Wegner as well.

My best,

Ed

_____________________________________________________________________________________

 

Date:Sun, 06 Oct 2013 23:41
From: Ed Schroder
Subject: Re: Rybka and the ICGA
To: David Levy 
Cc: Vasik Rajlich, Soren Riis

 

Hello David,

About your non answer:

2011
- During the course of the investigation and upon presentation of the Secretariat's report Vasik Rajlich did not offer, despite repeated invitations from the ICGA to do so, any kind of defence to the allegations, or to the evidence, or to the Secretariat's report
.

2013 - During the course of the request for an appeal and upon presentation of the arguments in favor, David Levy did not offer, despite repeated invitations from Vasik Rajlich to do so, any kind of defence to the arguments offered, nor to the criticism, nor to the contra investigation.

While 2011 is an untruth, 2013 is the truth.

My best,

Ed

___________________________________________________________________________________

 

                                     

                                           Hereafter the discussion stalled.

 

Copyright ® 2013 Ed Schröder