In order to make its decision, each strategy is allowed to know the entire history of this match, as well as all previous matches by itself and its opponent
Only the matches between itself and its opponent or all its matches and all its opponent's matches?
Second the question. The default meaning seems to be the first but the latter is the only one that would make sense as a rule to have if the game is to be at all interesting.
EDIT: As I recieved fewer than 8 entries for both tournaments, I will not be running them. My apologies to those who did enter.
After the success of prase's Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma tournament, a number of people expressed interest in some variations on the initial tournament, including one with a reputation system from one match to the next. I've been trying to teach myself to program over the past few months, so I thought I'd have a go at implementing it.
As well as the vanilla p.d. competition, I thought I'd run a second tournament based on the game of chicken, which is similar to p.d. but reverses the last two pay-offs, making it better (at least in the short term) to co-operate with a defector. This obviously creates a greater potential for bully strategies (although you can also bully in p.d.), so I thought it might have some interesting consequences with a reputation system.
Exact rules are as follows:
Deadline for entry is 21st September. If I get fewer than 8 I won't run it, if I get more than 30 I'll run it with the first 30, so don't delay.
EDIT: To clarify for any who were confused, each strategy has access to all of its own matches and all of its opponents matches, not just matches between itself and its opponent.