Biel (Rapid Match) (2016)

Biel (Juniors Rapid A) (2016)

Biel (Svidler - MVL) (2016)

and when it's available:

and when it's available: >

He didn't say what film and there were three screens.

I was popping my head into each screen.

Screen 1 was Dangerous Liaisons. Screen 2 was Kindergarten Cop. And Screen 3 was The Three Stooges in Punch Drunk.

Let me just comment that without a mind of an accountant I misspoke: the verb I was looking for was <spend>. When we enforce a posting guideline, we spend money, just like McDonalds spends money when they buy a truckload of beef. I don't think anybody can argue with that.

I really don't remember much about the Pierluigi Piscopo affair. It was filled with jokes by or about Joe Piscopo, right?

I'd also like to say on the subject of consistency: years ago Albert Artidiello did perhaps 70% of the Whistle complaints, and put people on probation when he saw fit. I was a night owl so I did that shift.

Albert and I had very different opinions on which members added character to the site and which ones were "troublemakers." Some of the members he thought were detrimental are still here today and have proven quite the opposite. Others, he couldn't have been more right about. He had a bias against users who were sometimes a little bawdy, not because he was a prude, but he felt CG should be a 100% family-friendly site. I agreed, but not as strongly as he felt on the issue. So there were some inconsistencies caused by that.

Is this true?

With regards to certain biographies, where <CG> seems cleaning up a few off-topic posts is more important than incorporating important biographical data, especially portraits of certain players?

Despite promising action to certain biographers (ok, me) at various times for a player such as this:

Klaus Junge

who has <105> games, and played at master level.

Whereas a relatively minor player, with but <4> minor-league games, has this treatment:

Arthur Hermann Privonitz

which includes not only a full-blown biography but an over-sized photograph?

Where is the balance and sense of historical perspective in this treatment?

<Favoritism> does come to mind.

(1) User: Tabanus: Berlin, Germany, Births, 1874-1899;

Go to <Tab>'s profile and search for Berlin.

Why are there so many off-topic posts remaining on Fogarty, whereas so many minor off-topic posts have been deleted on G Key?

According to the Oberherr Tab the former was officially declared <"axed by CG per 26 July 2016">. I assume the current <Forgarty> now meets with his approval, or does it?

Here is a list of authors with non-topical positing on <Forgarty> (which really should be <Forgerty> in the first place):

<OCF>, <WannaBe>, <Calli>, <Jim Bartle>, <Technical Draw>, <DanielBryant>, <YouJoin>, <TheAlchemist>, <OpenDefence>, <HMM>, <Dredge Rivers>, <Penguincw>, <tamar>

(You want lists? We got lists!)

I know I had non-profane postings on <G Key> go missing.

Why not a similar treatment for <Forgarty>? Where is the fairness and balance in this treatment?

<z> You wrote

<With regards to certain biographies, where <CG> seems cleaning up a few off-topic posts is more important than incorporating important biographical data, especially portraits of certain players?

Despite promising action to certain biographers (ok, me) at various times for a player such as this:

Klaus Junge>

I checked out the action on that page and I see you refer to missing <Junge> games and a lack of photo, amirite.

I understand and I can't help but agree- if there's a photo Daniel can use he should put it in. If there are <Junge> games submitted that haven't been uploaded, that should be a priority. He's a major chess player and a major figure in chess history, especially in the pre-war and World War II period.

I'd just like to ask you about something else, for a moment, though it's related to your post- your post made me think of this again.

You aren't a biographer, unless you have accepted the position since I last spoke about it with you?

I wish you would become a biographer. I'd wager our webmaster would be happy if you became a biographer. I can't even imagine a better candidate for that (non paying) job.

I'm thinking of the vast wealth of historical sources and detail about players and events that you have given to this website- in the form of kibbutzes.

I'm grateful for the considerable help you gave me on my Smyslov and Tal tournament record metacollections, in particular.

But how much of your hard work has actually been implemented? If you were a biographer you could just put your work in yourself.

So in the case of <Junge> and his bio, for example, you could directly enter the fruits of your labor- you wouldn't need to ask other biographers or cg.com to do it. I just noticed you have found some amazing sources that could be used to improve <Junge's> bio.

Please become a biographer. It's no burden, because you don't have to work any more than you want to. Then your valuable chess history posts- which eventually get buried by "turning pages"- would all become part of the record, greatly improving the quality of our database. Also, you could vote for Tournament Index submissions.

<Daniel> heh no I didn't know you could edit old posts, but I suppose I should have known that.

At that point I told Lee to stop removing posts because he had exhausted the truly awful ones and started to get into the more cultured areas such as music and sports and puzzles. We'll revisit the issue soon after more thought goes into how to handle the larger pages. the ones that could be said to be "institutions."

We need to figure out how to handle pages like Rogoff and then once we tackle that beast, the rest are creampuffs.

Your list will come in valuable so thank you, and if you want me to save it to my desktop I will do that so you can free up your profile page for other uses.

<I put Fogarty back to my unaxed list - even if I believe you deleted some posts in it.>

I could go see what was deleted from there, but it hardly matters. it could be that Lee deleted some of the sillier posts and left others? I don't know.

BTW, if you scroll down you see that OHC claims that we lost 20 (!) paying customers because it was perceived by most people that deleting message of people having harmless fun is humorless and they would not support such an operation.

So please understand that while some cases are outright violations I hesitate to step into areas where people mean no harm but are merely using the site in unorthodox ways.

If John Fogarty fans coalesce on the Fogarty page, you are right it's not sanctioned, but it's not the biggest of our worries.