ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 673 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Jan-10-14
 | | Tabanus: <cg> Amsterdam Candidates (1956) has 3-1-0 scoring! It must have happened recently. Why? How?? |
|
| Jan-10-14 | | Benzol: <cg> I've sent the first seven rounds of the 121st NZ Chmps to you. Must be getting nearer to the 5000 uploaded games mark by now. |
|
| Jan-10-14 | | MarkFinan: Ceegee.. Well thank you for the explanation, but when I have time I'll go through that file, find the games that aren't in your database, verify them elsewhere, and then put them all in a single file for you to add to your database. I need a computer crash course so I'll figure out how to do all this.. once I get my computer out of the box and my mate comes and gives me a hand.
I really do want to stick to chess now, but with everything that's gone on here before, whether my fault or not, it's kinda hard because there's always a few numpties trying to drag me back down. This site has some really nice and helpful people, <hms123> being a perfect example, so I may need some help with certain things, but I would like to offer positive things to this site chesswise in the new year. Bit sick of Daniel probing me ;), and I'm not going to be going through all that again in 2014. ✌ |
|
Jan-10-14
 | | chessgames.com: <Tabanus: Amsterdam Candidates (1956) has 3-1-0 scoring! It must have happened recently.> Really? <Why? How??> That's exactly what I'm asking myself: how?? Thanks for pointing this out, we will investigate. |
|
Jan-10-14
| | chessgames.com: We found there were 5 or 6 tournaments all right around TID #82662 which were wrongly set to 3-1-0 scoring. That's a clue. I want to believe it was introduced by a string of typos but it's not clear how that could be. FYI, the earliest legitimate 3-1-0 scoring we know about is Bilbao Blindfold Chess World Cup (2007). |
|
| Jan-11-14 | | davide2013: This is a 82 moves game, which can only be added by the Admin in Guess the Move: Von Bardeleben vs Tarrasch, 1888
It is part of the book: three hundred chess games by Siegbert Tarrasch. |
|
Jan-11-14
| | chessgames.com: <Lonnie Lurko: Tim Harding writes on Chesscafe.com: http://www.chesscafe.com/kibitz/kib...> Lonnie, while we thank you for pointing out that link, we're not discussing Mr. Urcan's or Harding's article on this page at this time, as it's not a support issue. User: Karpova generously welcomed such discussion on her chessforum. |
|
Jan-11-14
 | | WCC Editing Project: <Daniel>, <Lonnie Lurko>, <colleagues>. With regard to further discussion of <Mr. Urcan's> or <Mr. Harding's> articles, we invite you to redirect your comments to our forum, since this topic is directly on point with our current project. |
|
| Jan-11-14 | | Lonnie Lurko: I'd have thought an observation by a respected chess historian on the problems with this site might reasonably be expected to be directed to the siteowner. I would also have thought it was unnecessary to delete it. No, it's not a support issue. It's more important than that. |
|
Jan-11-14
 | | OhioChessFan: 2 suggested places to discuss this matter. I think it's fair for cg.c to request we use them. User: WCC Editing Project User: karpova |
|
Jan-11-14
| | chessgames.com: <I'd have thought an observation by a respected chess historian on the problems with this site might reasonably be expected to be directed to the site owner.> I thanked you for it, didn't I? <I would also have thought it was unnecessary to delete it.> Delete it? Hardly. The entirety of your post was intentionally quoted above for anybody who wants to check out the article. The only thing deleted was your superfluous copy-paste of the entire piece which came after the link. When you copy-paste an entire article like that, it's an invitation to discuss the article on this page, which we are not going to have. Once again, for those who missed the "deleted" material, here it is again: http://www.chesscafe.com/kibitz/kib... (Scroll down to the postscript section.) For those who want to discuss that article and others related to CG, Ohio's two suggestions are perfect, and there are other appropriate pages as well. |
|
Jan-11-14
| | OhioChessFan: Could you repost the 3 or so disappeared kibitzes somewhere? |
|
Jan-11-14
| | chessgames.com: Sorry, there's no convenient way to do that. |
|
| Jan-12-14 | | Benzol: <chessgames> You have all the PGN now so can we please have a page for the 121st New Zealand Ch. |
|
| Jan-12-14 | | Lonnie Lurko: <The only thing deleted was your superfluous copy-paste of the entire piece which came after the link. When you copy-paste an entire article like that> Four paragraphs of an entire article is not an entire article of course. <it's an invitation to discuss the article on this page, which we are not going to have> No, I can see how you'd find that a problem.
But see, I'm not interested in being shuffled over somewhere else, because what I'm interested in is the siteowner's opinion. Not other people's opinion, the siteowner's opinion. On Mr Urcan's article, on Mr Harding's comments, on the recent Streatham and Brixton articles. Because it's the siteowner who bears the responsibility, isn't it? There are serious questions being asked about the site's material, methods and friends. Now it's entirely your privilege if you want to ignore, avoid or delete them. But it's your response that's being requested, not anybody else's. |
|
| Jan-12-14 | | Benzol: <chessgames> Thanks for New Zealand Championship (2014) You might want to add B Hague vs A Krstev, 2014 to the roster too. :) |
|
Jan-12-14
 | | Domdaniel: <Lonnie Lurko> Sorry to disappoint you, but the way CG works -- the way that this site has always worked -- is to foreground communications from members. As in, all of us. If you want to discuss a topic, be prepared for input from everyone else.
This forum is not a privileged space where admins offer their perspective. It is, as Daniel has already pointed out, intended to deal with 'support issues'.
In addition, I happen to think that long copy-paste pieces are just a nuisance.
There is simply no reason to think that comments made elsewhere by people such as Urcan or Harding should be dealt with here. |
|
Jan-12-14
| | chessgames.com: <Lonnie Lurko> <I'm not interested in being shuffled over somewhere else...> That's too bad, because this forum is specifically intended for other purposes. <...because what I'm interested in is the siteowner's opinion.> I already said that I would compose a reply to Mr. Urcan's article when time permits, and when that time comes it still won't be on this forum. <On Mr Urcan's article, on Mr Harding's comments, on the recent Streatham and Brixton articles.> So now it's five articles to which you expect a reply? |
|
| Jan-12-14 | | hms123: <cg> Could you check the move in the World game? There seems to be a typo that has prevented the move from showing on the board. |
|
| Jan-12-14 | | chesstoplay: Have you been hacked?
There seems to be some question tonight about the latest move in the World Team Challenge with GM SKW. The move's notation from GM SKW and the diagram, assuming the move is correct, are both wrong. Please address a response on the main thread of the game so everyone is equally up to date. TY!
Peter / chesstoplay |
|
Jan-12-14
 | | AylerKupp: <chessgames.com> I just wanted to bring to your attention that in the Chessgames Challenge game GM Simon Williams has apparently entered a move that is not recognized, 32.F4 instead of (presumably) 32.f4. As a result, the current game position diagram was not updated. You might want to check with him to verify that this is the move he intended. The team is proceeding as though the intended move was 32.f4 so, if it wasn't, it should be corrected ASAP. Thanks. |
|
Jan-12-14
| | chessgames.com: < Have you been hacked? > Heavens no, it seems Simon typed "F4" instead of "f4" and our persnickety software refused to update the board. We just righted the situation; sorry for the inconvenience. |
|
| Jan-12-14 | | chesstoplay: TY for the quick fix tonight!
TY, again, for all the good you do for chess!
:) |
|
Jan-13-14
| | AylerKupp: <chessgames.com> Don't you just hate persnickety software? Is there any other kind? :-) |
|
| Jan-13-14 | | Lonnie Lurko: <So now it's five articles to which you expect a reply?> That's the number of critical articles that there have been recently (though you could count the Streatham and Brixton pieces as one rather than three). So that's the number that merit a reply. What I expect, now that's a harder question. <I already said that I would compose a reply to Mr. Urcan's article when time permits> Cool. Can you speculate as to when that might be?
<and when that time comes it still won't be on this forum.> Where should we look? |
|
 |
|
ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 673 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
