< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 535 OF 601 ·
|Jun-16-12|| ||chancho: <Annie> http://www.amazon.com/Harry-Potter-...|
|Jun-16-12|| ||hms123: <Annie>
Here are some examples:
They seem to be rife on the ground.
|Jun-16-12|| ||Annie K.: Thanks, guys. :) I doubt I'd want to actually play with one of those sets, but I suppose they are kinda cute, at least for decorative purposes, and/or play, if one gets used to them. Well, anything to get kids interested in chess... ;)|
|Jun-16-12|| ||twinlark: <chessgames.com: <I think it (just the 'FIDE player card' link) would look good right under the 'Last published FIDE rating' line. :)> That's a very good idea.>|
It's still a good idea...erm...but "FIDE.com player card"(?)
|Jun-16-12|| ||Blunderdome: <CG> Thought I had heard that Bogart has set up a position from the Immortal Game -- anyone know for sure which it is?|
|Jun-16-12|| ||chessgames.com: There's some discussion of that subject on the Humphrey Bogart page.|
|Jun-17-12|| ||Stonehenge: I've tried to update two player's pages with their FIDE cards. The first one didn't show his FIDE card *at all* and the second one showed <FIDE.com player card> after <Last FIDE rating>.|
|Jun-17-12|| ||chessgames.com: <Stonehenge> We're playing around a little bit with the display of the FIDE link. Now that we've moved the location of the FIDE link the response time is no longer guaranteed to be instantaneous (but in some cases it is.) We didn't want to say anything about this change because this too may change in the near future. In short, we're playing around with different ways of doing this.|
Fear not that your information was entered in vain: if you entered the FIDE # we have that info and it will be used and displayed, sooner or later.
|Jun-17-12|| ||Stonehenge: Thank you :)|
|Jun-18-12|| ||Benzol: <We're playing around a little bit with the display of the FIDE link. Now that we've moved the location of the FIDE link the response time is no longer guaranteed to be instantaneous (but in some cases it is.) We didn't want to say anything about this change because this too may change in the near future. In short, we're playing around with different ways of doing this.
Fear not that your information was entered in vain: if you entered the FIDE # we have that info and it will be used and displayed, sooner or later
As a biographer I can see the FIDE number at the bottom of the page but what about those people who aren't? I know that I uploaded a fair number ( no pun intended ) of FIDE numbers for New Zealand players and they were visible for kibitzers to click onto. Now they've just disappeared. How do kibitzers find them now? A good example is our own <Richard Taylor>.
|Jun-18-12|| ||chessgames.com: <Benzol> I think I understand what you are saying but please understand that we are not removing the FIDE links, it's just that as of a few days back a *delay* was introduced.|
This delay is already well known to the super-admins like the CG Librarian. For example, when she moves some games from one Ivanov to another, the win percentage does not change instantly. Likewise, after Magnus's win today his statistics aren't instantly changed. Those headers are computed and cached away by a program that runs in the wee-hours of the morning. If you come back tomorrow you'll see that his stats may have changed a bit, but it's not instant.
The reason to want to do it this way is one of software efficiency considerations: so that when people pull up Carlsen's page the software doesn't have to compute his favorite openings for the millionth time that day.
To make matters more complex, we also have a concept of "minor players" vs "major players" which simply has to do with the number of games. I want to stress it has nothing to do with how good or poor of a player they were--for example, "NN" is a major player, while Captain Evans is a "minor" player. That doesn't mean Captain Evans was a patzer, it just means we don't have many games for him, and therefore we do NOT precompute a cached header. The technical point to this distinction is that with minor players it's no longer worth the administrative overhead to create a cache file for them, it's actually more efficient to compute their statistics on the fly every time their page is loaded.
Oh, and did I mention, the delay is not always 24 hours? Every night the software works on recomputing headers, but if it finds that there has been too many mass changes, it tends to the highest rated players first and leaves the rest for the next night. So in theory it could take a as long as week for a low rated player to see an update to his header. Very unlikely, but possible.
The biographers, who have been spoiled by "instant gratification" for all these years, now are running up firmly against this delay. One attitude could be "tough, live with it" -- but frankly if there was a way to make all of this invisible to the biographers I would do it. We have nothing against "instant gratification", it's just a tall order sometimes.
|Jun-18-12|| ||chessgames.com: On a related subject, what is best?
<FIDE.com player card>
<fide.com player card>
<FIDE player card>
or something else?
Note that it is a priority to us that the end-user is perfectly aware that clicking this link will cause them to leave Chessgames. That's why the ".com" is somewhat important to us. We're not one of these sites that prohibits linking to other sites but we don't want to steer confused readers in the direction of fide.com for no reason at all.
For similar logic, brevity is important. <FIDE.com player rating card> might be the most correct but it would stand out as the prominent link on the page if we called it that. The shorter the text, the less obtrusive it is. We don't expect people to be clicking on these very much at all, but it should be easy to find if they need it.
|Jun-18-12|| ||WannaBe: Player's rating card <ON> fide.com|
|Jun-18-12|| ||chessgames.com: <Benzol> Reviewing the Richard Taylor case I see a problem that you were probably trying to point out to me but I was too dense to understand what you were getting at. Poor Mr. Taylor does have a FIDE rating, but we can't see it, and what's worse there's no link to his card where we would be able to see it.|
Furthermore Taylor is a "minor player" (no offense Richard) and therefore the delay factor has nothing to do with his case.
Now, if the new rating list came out, Richard would be correctly identified and our record on him would be updated with a current FIDE rating. Then the link would appear and everything would be kosher. But as things stand we have the data and are hiding it.
OK, just call this a temporary bug. When we make changes like this there are ripple effects, but don't worry, we'll get it sorted out. Thanks.
|Jun-18-12|| ||Stonehenge: I prefer <FIDE player card> and to have the link just below <Search Google>.|
<Note that it is a priority to us that the end-user is perfectly aware that clicking this link will cause them to leave Chessgames. That's why the ".com" is somewhat important to us.>
But it also says <Search Google>, not <Search Google.com>.
|Jun-18-12|| ||Annie K.: Either <FIDE player card> or <FIDE card> works well for me. I don't like the .com version, because it may be the domain name, but it's not the name of the organization. I'd say that, .com or no .com, it's fairly clear that clicking this link would mean leaving cg FIDEwards. ;) |
Locationwise, I like the small link after the last rating (same line). This is like saying, here's some FIDE data on the player, if you want to know more, go to the source - very natural. :)
|Jun-18-12|| ||chessgames.com: <Stonehenge: I prefer <FIDE player card> and to have the link just below <Search Google>> Not a bad idea. Go back to our initial position on it.|
<But it also says <Search Google>, not <Search Google.com>> Well, everybody knows what Google is. Or if they don't, we're doing them a favor by showing them that the internet contains more than just Chessgames ;-)
|Jun-18-12|| ||Phony Benoni: FIDE itself uses <FIDE Chess Profile>. That's not bad, but seems to imply a narrative. Of the choices you present I prefer <FIDE Player Card>; it implies a brief summary in which more than rating information is provided.|
Speaking as a computer layperson, I find the additon of ".com" to be confusing and unnecessary. But if it's necessary for some reason, so be it.
I think the current location, underneath the FIDE rating, is a logical place to display it. It was harder to spot in the Google area, not to mention having to scroll down.
|Jun-18-12|| ||Benzol: <I see a problem that you were probably trying to point out to me but I was too dense to understand what you were getting at. Poor Mr. Taylor does have a FIDE rating, but we can't see it, and what's worse there's no link to his card where we would be able to see it.>|
Yes, that was it exactly. Sorry if it wasn't clear the way I put it.
And I think I prefer <FIDE player card> for the link but this is just a personal preference.
|Jun-18-12|| ||twinlark: My tuppence:
I like <FIDE player card> without the ".com" also. I'm sure most people would realise they are leaving chessgames.com (how can they not?), but even if they don't, is that a problem? They'll learn that it is sooner or later and I can't see there are any especially bad consequences if a couple of people are temporarily confused.
I vote for <FIDE player card> in the current location after <Last FIDE rating>.
|Jun-18-12|| ||twinlark: I nearly forgot to mention that the Russian Championship has started.|
|Jun-18-12|| ||Benzol: BTW is the link problem something that has to be fixed on a case by case basis? I was just looking at Winston Yao to see if the problem was something that could be fixed in a blanket fashion. Sorry to be a nuisance about this.|
|Jun-19-12|| ||Richard Taylor: <CG.com> How dare you accuse me of being a minor!! I have played some of the most brilliantly terrible games known to humankind!! My blunders have reached the ears of such as ..well, Petrovic (admittedly an unknown but he once got fools mate against GM Shockalov (who, admittedly was rather inebriated));...but I hear that such as Kramnik, Anand, Topalov himself and even Kasparov's trainee Carlsen have paid attention to some of my opening blund-I mean- innovations.......|
<Benzol> Don't mention Winston Yao!!!
|Jun-19-12|| ||frogbert: <chessgames.com>
here's a suggestion that's very easy to implement and which i think would make site manouvering quicker and more convenient for many:
* make the <Earlier Kibitzing> and <Later Kibitzing> links take us to the *top of the kibitzing area* of the previous/next page.
looking at the html source i noticed that the link-anchor is already in place, hence adding #kibitzing to the links is all it takes. in particular for certain user forums where the owner has 10+ screenfulls of stuff in his/her profile section, this would be a big time saver when browsing the kibitzing, but it would also come in handy for most player pages.
please, pretty please? :o)
|Jun-19-12|| ||YouRang: <frogbert> Brilliant minds think alike. I made the same suggestion almost exactly five years ago (June 28 2007). |
Perhaps things have changed -- Good luck. :-)
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 535 OF 601 ·