If I was promoting this topic I would wonder what the purpose of it was ? To find support for the claims made in the original thread ? It is certainly odd that they are repeated.
As far as I know most evolutionary simulators do not make a major attempt to represent the complexities of biology, preferring to simplify and abstract those, in favour of focussing on the evolutionary process directly. However I see no reason to believe that they are "designed to produce exactly what the programmer wants" in terms of evolutionary success.
However, the description given simply ignores whatever is going on beneath the surface. It ignores, for instance, the role played by food and reproduction in even the simple example given in the link. And that example is almost certainly not the sort of thing Taz meant - Taz more likely meant Avida or the older Tierra.
It seems that once again we have a creationist inventing his own "facts".