> How far should you let someone fuck around with your license terms before you decide to exercise the nuclear option?
Game theory (specifically the iterated prisoners' dilemma) says: once. Many results from psychology - especially parenting - support the same conclusion. Both punishment/retribution for bad behavior and reward for improving behavior should be swift and unambiguous. It's ChessBase's turn to cooperate and show some good faith. Words alone won't do it.
This isnt at all related to rhe original topic but if you like game theory, you'll love this paper[1]. (Tl;dr tit-for-tat isn't the optimal strategy after all).
Also, in repeated prisoner's dilemma with random errors, it has been long known that tit-for-tat isn't the best strategy either.
Game theory (specifically the iterated prisoners' dilemma) says: once. Many results from psychology - especially parenting - support the same conclusion. Both punishment/retribution for bad behavior and reward for improving behavior should be swift and unambiguous. It's ChessBase's turn to cooperate and show some good faith. Words alone won't do it.