ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 903 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Mar-29-16 | | zanzibar: Hey, not to change the subject <CG>, but have you had a chance to consider the PGN Source tag? <[Source ][Source][Source ][Source ][Source ][Source][Source ]> I know you'd like to outsource me on this, but I'm finding some interesting games which I really would like to submit with the <[Source ][Source][Source ][Source ][Source ][Source][Source ]> source tag intact. |
|
| Mar-29-16 | | Tiggler: <zanzibar> Interesting comment. I always thought the expression you cited was <"from the sublime to the gor'blimey">. |
|
| Mar-29-16 | | rookhouse: <chessgames> Not sure why E Schallopp vs Gossip, 1900 is showing the year 1900? The code clearly shows the date as 1890.08.29 (Round 7). It is preventing me from nominating Game Collection: Manchester 1890. Please let me know if this is not the correct place to ask this question. Posted previously on the Bistro, but heard crickets. |
|
| Mar-29-16 | | Tiggler: I think I might have just posted some blasphemy: gor'blimey. If so, don't mention it, <OhioChessFan> et al., just Blow. |
|
| Mar-29-16 | | zanzibar: <Tiggler> never heard your way before. <rookhouse> I'm interested in an answer to inquiry too. I've nothing to add other than that I looked at it after your post, and it looks bizarre. Something <CG> is doing internally I think, so this is a better forum than the Bistro. |
|
| Mar-29-16 | | rookhouse: Thanks <zanzibar>, I shall patiently await an answer. |
|
Mar-30-16
 | | FSR: I submitted this game over two months ago now, and it still isn't in the database: [Event "110th U.S. Open"]
[Site "Indianapolis, IN"]
[Date "2009.08.09"]
[EventDate "?"]
[Round "?"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Fedorowicz, John"]
[Black "Rosen, Eric"]
[ECO "D35"]
[WhiteElo "2469"]
[BlackElo "2141"]
1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. cxd5 exd5 5. Bg5 c6 6. e3 Bf5 7. g4 Be6 8. h3 Nbd7 9. f4 Nb6 10. Bd3 Be7 11. Nf3 Qd6 12. f5 Qg3+ 13. Kd2 Ne4+ 14. Nxe4 dxe4 15. Bxe4 Qf2+ 16. Kc3 Bb4+ 0-1 |
|
Mar-30-16
| | FSR: I echo others' comments about <mamoni>. Surely we don't need his adolescent remarks about his alleged sexual escapades with other members' mothers and sisters. But they're still there at this writing. |
|
Mar-30-16
 | | WannaBe: <rookhouse> & <zanzibar> submit a correction slip? |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | zanzibar: <WannaBe> I'd let that to <Rookfile> to do... But the question is how did <CG> tag the game as 1900 in the first place? It's clearly from 1890, nothing says 1900 anywhere I could see. So, it's an example of a pathology which deserves some examination beyond a simple run-of-the-mill correction. |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | zanzibar: <CG> yet another suggestion... On an <Edit Collection> page, would it be possible to include a column of the #moves in a game. Currently the info shown is
<order> <game> <ECO> <Result> Actually, I wouldn't mind expanding the info show in the <game> link to also include #moves, ECO, result and date, with date being yyyy.mm.dd. Of course this is probably asking for too much, so lets start with #moves in the collection edit page. . |
|
Mar-30-16
 | | chessgames.com: <But the question is how did <CG> tag the game as 1900 in the first place?> I think I know the answer to that. At some point, perhaps in the early 2000s, there must have been some very poor chess database that was incapable of storing years prior to 1900. Because of that there are games prior to 1900 that are listed as 1900. Sometimes I see them show up as 1901. About years on the edit page, yes it's a fine idea, but off the top of my head I thought they were already there. I'll go edit a collection and look at it now. |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | morfishine: <Tiggler> On your comment: <...Cleaning up the mess is time consuming, so we cannot expect it to happen as if you could wave a wand> This is weak. My posting privileges were suspended and my post deleted because I called <KP> a "doofus". This all happened in less than a day, so lets forego the legal mumbo-jumbo and at the very least, stop patronizing everybody with your condescending worthlessness...thank you very much... |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | TheFocus: <<OhioChessFan: On a related note, could you gently request the Candidates page cease and desist with the Giri draw "jokes"? Sure, it is something to smile about, a little, but 20 pages of it in the midst of an important tournament page?>> But now that the tournament is over... can't we just have some fun, or do you still wish to draw the line? |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | morfishine: <TheFocus> The point that <OhioChessFan> is trying to make, if I'm not mistaken, is that the forum for the 2016 Candidates, is or was created for serious chess enthusiasts, and posts should be on-topic related to the actual tournament. Now, if you want to insult <Daniel> and support actions that go against his wishes, go ahead Whats so hard to understand about posting in the appropriate place or forum? ***** |
|
Mar-30-16
| | FSR: <mamoni>'s comments are still up. Evidently chessgames.com approves of them. |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | morfishine: <FSR> I noticed that too. I don't know what the problem is. As I mentioned earlier, I got suspended and my posts deleted in less than a day for using the "attacking" word doofus Yet, this garbage is left to hang around...go figure...We can only try ***** |
|
Mar-30-16
| | chessgames.com: Apologies about misbehavior; we're tending to Whistles right now. |
|
Mar-30-16
| | chessgames.com: Apologies again again about that troll, nobody checked the Whistle page here until just now and he ran amuck. If he comes back Whistle again; I'm on the lookout for his return. <zanzibar> I added the # of moves to the collection page. Let me know if it looks OK. <Actually, I wouldn't mind expanding the info shown in the game link to also include #moves, ECO, result and date, with date being yyyy.mm.dd.> So a link to Karjakin vs Caruana, 2016 would show up as < Karjakin vs Caruana, 2016.03.28, 1-0, 42 moves> or something like that? Surely you mean just on the collections page, not everywhere? |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | Tiggler: <chessgames.com> It seems you (and others) did not notice that it was obscene and insulting posts by <Dragi> that set <mamoni> off. Prior to <Dragi>'s offensive insults, <mamoni>'s posts were merely silly. How come <Dragi>'s posts are still there? (I did blow him, too - oops, I might have misphrased that) |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | Tiggler: Prior to this post
Karjakin vs Caruana, 2016 there were no violations by <mamoni>, except of aristotelian logic. Naturally, it will be proper to delete my posts and others that refer to infractions that have been removed, if you are serious about the cleanup process. |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | zanzibar: <<zanzibar> I added the # of moves to the collection page. Let me know if it looks OK.> It looks great. Quite helpful to distinguish games in a match where Paulsen's 3/4 games as White are C02. * * * * *
< Karjakin vs Caruana, 2016.03.28, 1-0, 42 moves> Yes, I was thinking of some elaboration along those lines, though I think the "moves" and commas could be omitted. I use a Python class with a __repr__ override to print out this format: <1879.07.24 C02 73 (R7) 1-0 Paulsen, Louis -- Schwarz, Adolf> Having moves and round number is very handy.
BTW- I put the names last to make it nicer for tabular listing. |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | TheFocus: <<OhioChessFan: On a related note, could you gently request the Candidates page cease and desist with the Giri draw "jokes"? Sure, it is something to smile about, a little, but 20 pages of it in the midst of an important tournament page?>> I think we have drawn to that time when another 20 or so pages of Giri jokes are needed. |
|
| Mar-30-16 | | zanzibar: Addendum: Of course the short-style game link should be default in posts. But it would be nice to have some syntax even there to get the longer format. And certainly for any page which is just a listing of games the longer format should be the default. Leastwise, that would be my vote. |
|
Mar-30-16
 | | Annie K.: <cg: <So a link to Karjakin vs Caruana, 2016 would show up as < Karjakin vs Caruana, 2016.03.28, 1-0, 42 moves> or something like that? Surely you mean just on the collections page, not everywhere?>> Hmm, I like the format <Karjakin vs Caruana, 2016.03.28, 1-0, 42 moves> just the way it is. And maybe it would be a good idea to adopt (just) the date addition to tournament pages too? That would certainly make it easier to tell <rounds> apart, which is also a long-standing recurring request here. :) |
|
 |
|
ARCHIVED POSTS
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 903 OF 1118 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
