chessgames.com: <MissScarlett: Can you explain how often you update the site with regard to submitted games and corrections?> From the admin's point of view both processes look very similar. The admin sees a list of contributions which can be sorted by username, size, type, and most importantly by "time waiting."
I'm actually processing games right now so I'll give you a little window into what the process looks like.
I see this poor fellow who's been waiting since 2013 and I review his submission. It's been reviewed earlier this year without decision, now it's time for me to finalize it. His first game looks like this:
[White "Loui J."]
1. e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Bc4 d6 4. d4 Be6 5. d5 Bc8 6. Bxf4 g6 7. Nc3 Bg7 8.
Qd2 Nd7 9. Nf3 a5 10. O-O-O Ngf6 11. e5 dxe5 12. Nxe5 O-O 13. Nc6 bxc6 14.
dxc6 Qe7 15. cxd7 Nxd7 16. Bd5 Rb8 17. Bxc7 Ba6 18. Bxb8 Rxb8 19. Bxf7+ Qxf7
20. Qxd7 Qf4+ 21. Qd2 Qb4 22. Qd5+ Kh8 23. Kd2 Qf4+ 0-1
(Note that it doesn't really say "NN" but I don't want to embarrass who is most likely the submitter. It does however say "Loui J.")
I have several complaints. The [Event "?"] and [Site "?"] is pretty shoddy. No ratings, so I wonder how strong they are. I play through a King's Gambit, it has the typical swashbuckle you expect from that opening. But nothing special that I can see. If you want a game like this to be inserted it would help if you filled out the comments, like "To my knowledge this is the first time 12.Nxe5 has ever been played." or "Black has been a tournament director in Wisconsin for over 50 years" or something that explains why it should be included.
It sort of makes me feel bad, because this guy might have typed the game in by hand, but it doesn't meet our standards. I take solace in the fact that I'm not deleting his contribution, just shuttling it to a backup directory of old forgotten submissions. Conceivably one day this could rise from the grave in an upcoming feature.
Now it's clear if I continue this, I might never get up to the Sep/Nov 2014 submissions, so I scroll to the top of the list and find somebody who's been waiting for a while, but not eons. So glancing at the top of the list, I see waustad. Been waiting for a month. OK, waustad's turn it is. Only one game:
[Event "Steirische Landesliga 2014/2015"]
[White "Moser, Eva"]
[Black "Meszaros, Michal"]
[WhiteTeam "SV Schachamazonen Graz"]
[BlackTeam "SPG Horn Ratten-Krieglach"]
1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. Bc4 a6 4. a4 Nc6 5. O-O Nf6 6. Re1 e6 7. Bf1 Be7 8. c3 e5
9. d4 Qc7 10. d5 Nd8 11. b4 O-O 12. bxc5 dxc5 13. Na3 Ne8 14. Nc4 f6 15. Qb3
Nf7 16. Qb6 Rb8 17. Be3 Bg4 18. Nfd2 Rc8 19. f3 Bd7 20. Nb3 f5 21. Qxc7 Rxc7
22. Nb6 Nf6 23. Nxd7 Nxd7 24. exf5 c4 25. Nd2 Nd6 26. g4 Bh4 27. Red1 Nf6 28.
Nb1 h6 29. Na3 Rfc8 30. Rab1 Rd7 31. h3 Kf7 32. Rb4 a5 33. Rbb1 Ke7 34. Bb6 Ke8
35. Rb2 Bg3 36. Bxa5 Ra8 37. Bb4 Rxa4 38. Nxc4 1-0
Beautiful. I play through it just to make sure the PGN works, not so much to judge the play quality. The white player is famous, the black player's name rings a bell.
Verdict: inserted. I wish they all could be that easy.
Note that I'm not processing game-by-game but rather member-by-member. So if you uploaded a game yesterday it could easily be inserted today, along with all of your other games that you've been waiting on. (I see you've been waiting since the 20th. We'll get to them soon.)
I went through those two just to give you a flavor of the process. It's very pell mell, I know. Comes to mind that old saying about people who enjoy sausages — they shouldn't see how they are made.
<I appreciate that you cannot simply wave through all submissions without review, but it's frustrating not knowing when, or if, one's contributions will appear.>
I sympathize and it's clear that this is not an efficient way to work. We'll have a better system one day. It's my belief that this job can only be accomplished effectively by crowdsourcing.