SNC ethos?

[reyn]

admin said:

I think I need to come up with a different approach to storing game comments. Maybe I can allow more comments - and bigger comments - if I delete the comments after a game is finished, or after a certain time has gone by after a game is finished???

Yes, Stan, that approach would certainly be acceptable to me. I see no reason why the comments would need to be stored along with the moves forever.

Either deleting them after the completion of the game or after a certain length of time would be good.

I suspect that this would take some work on your behalf though. I don't see this as a priority at all.

One thing that has been requested a lot is to allow comments be made at any time - not just when submitting a move.

In my opinion, this is totally unnecessary. We have the ability to make Private Messages with this message board. So, this is not the way I think we should go.

[Johnny5]

reyn said:

One thing that has been requested a lot is to allow comments be made at any time - not just when submitting a move.

In my opinion, this is totally unnecessary. We have the ability to make Private Messages with this message board. So, this is not the way I think we should go.

Not everybody uses the message board. I don't think it is essential but to me personnaly, I would find it quite usefull.

[reyn]

johnny5 said:

reyn said:

In my opinion, this is totally unnecessary. We have the ability to make Private Messages with this message board. So, this is not the way I think we should go.

Not everybody uses the message board. I don't think it is essential but to me personnaly, I would find it quite usefull.

For those that are not familar with the message board and that one can communicate via the Private Messages feature, a note could be put on the screen that comes up once a move has been submitted. Everyone can register and then they could freely chat with their opponent.

So, I still see no need for an "Instant Messenger" type service attached to Stan's.

[Johnny5]

That's a fair point, I agree with you

[tizzy]

Maybe there could be something on the player page to indicate if they want to chat during a game so you know what you are getting when you meet an opponent

[Blockhead]

I'm a little disappointed Stan has chosen not to respond to my request concerning his original expectations for the site. I'd hoped he might confirm his wish to generate a chessic community in which friendships might blossom and grow.

Given some rather ill-considered comments (Reyn was particularly animated I want to reiterate that, whenever I challenge someone to play I usually stress my wish to 'chat' rather than just play. My potential opponent then has the option of playing me ... or not. It seems reasonable that each player has an opportunity to express their needs and expectations (ideally before the game begins!). 'Better said than guessed!'

Only The Ancient Brit (TAB) bothered to answer the question I posed: 'How successful has Stan been in creating his 'chessic community of friends'? My own response would be that Stan has made a very good start; but the ethos of the site (raw chess or chess & social chat leading to friendships), from what has been said here, remains uncertain.

Reyn says, ' ... this issue has nothing to do with Stan's site ...', is quite wrong! Stan designed SNC to allow all players the option to send a message with any move they make via the game dialog! It therefor has a good deal to do with Stan's site! And incidentally Reyn, present day chess (as well as 'chat'!), at every level, is, silicon or no, a 'people thing'. Always has been, always will be!

I'm grateful to those like Reyn who contributed to this particular subject. It allows me to avoid challenging them to play. I wouldn't be happy playing them; they in turn, would probably be unhappy playing chatty'ol me! :}

As TAB says, 'Stan’s is about chess and chat'. Like him I would find it difficult to continue if the facility for mutual message exchange did not exist. However, the fact that it's in the public domain is a mixed blessing. It would be far better if the players could have some way of selecting PD or private/confidential. Yes (Reyn), I know one could exchange emails! That's rather a top heavy solution, and one which is not always the most convenient or most appropriate option.

Stan clearly has to make decisions based on the constraints of the SNC servers. I suspect most SNCers would be content to have their game moves and comments removed after say three months or so. With sufficent notice, players who want to publish their 'best' games could always download them (including the game dialog!) before they removed :}

Like many others I'd like to have the option of sending (preferably private!) messages (from the player page!) after the move has been made. Stan says he'd like to do that though there would have to be a limit on the number and overall size of the comments. I like Stan's idea of allowing players (initially subscribers) to append messages >255 characters.

Stan mentions those who abuse this facility. One way to combat this sort of behaviour directly is by providing move messaging only to subscribers. An alternative approach might be player policing, i.e. those who come across such abuse report it to Stan directly. He could then take whatever action he felt appropriate in the circumstances.

My thanks to everyone who contributed ... including Reyn! ;-)

TAB rightly said during our game, 'You have touched on a sensitive issue with your [Ethos] thread.'. My response ... as always ... better said than guessed! :-)

[Stan Steliga]

I'm sorry I didn't respond to your question. Initially I was looking for other people to respond before I did and I never got back to your question.

I have always just tried to provide a place for people to play chess. It turns out that many friendships have started here, and I have also received many emails from family members that have been able to stay in touch daily more than they have before. Those are excellent to get!

The chatting aspect has never been a high priority. As has been pointed out, there are many other means of communication for players that want that. In fact, I think some players might consider it a bad thing if their opponent was able to ramble on and on when the player does not want to be chatty.

I appreciate your input. I hope you didn't feel I was just ignoring you. I'm always watching and listening.

[reyn]

bh said:

Reyn says, ' ... this issue has nothing to do with Stan's site ...', is quite wrong! Stan designed SNC to allow all players the option to send a message with any move they make via the game dialog! It therefor has a good deal to do with Stan's site!

You still miss the point, or you're deliberately trying to avoid it.

Stan could build a "state of the art" chat system, and that doesn't mean players are going to use it.

It boils down to some like to chat, and others don't. Why not leave it there?

The main point of this site is to play chess. Stan has provided an area for some dialogue. In my opinion (you would disagree and that's fine), it is good enough, at least for now. Stan has many more important issues to tackle for this site, and that one isn't a priority, and may never be.

And incidentally Reyn, present day chess (as well as 'chat'!), at every level, is, silicon or no, a 'people thing'. Always has been, always will be!

When was the last time you saw players chat in an OTB game? "Chess chat" is very much a correspondence chess thing. You would get kicked out on your ear if you tried that in person.

As TAB says, 'Stan’s is about chess and chat'. Like him I would find it difficult to continue if the facility for mutual message exchange did not exist.

Yes, and that is his and your choice. It is not mandatory. I like chat, too, but I'm not pushy about it. Some just want to play chess and not engage in conversation, and some, as I mentioned previously, don't have good English skills to engage in chat.

Yes (Reyn), I know one could exchange emails! That's rather a top heavy solution, and one which is not always the most convenient or most appropriate option.

Like many others I'd like to have the option of sending (preferably private!) messages (from the player page!) after the move has been made.

I was not talking about using emails to exchange dialogue, etc.

This board has a facilty to exchange Private Messages not using your email address. So, in other words, your address and your conversation remains private. This already exists!!

All that you're required to do to use it is to register your name and get a password (both yourself and your opponent).

If you want to send messages after you make a move, all you would have to do is to open up a second window and you can do both at the same time (move and chat). So, it really isn't necessary for Stan to build a whole new system to accomodate for what you are asking.

Stan clearly has to make decisions based on the constraints of the SNC servers.

Exactly! And it costs money to pay for the use of servers. So, if anyone is interested in making this "chessic community" grow, the best thing you can do is to subscribe to this site. That way Stan is able to keep it going and develop additional future features.

A way to ensure that it will not grow, is to keep playing for free. If those who aren't subscribers put their hand in their pocket once a year for $12 for a 3 month subscription, I'm sure that would help a lot.

[Blockhead]

Reyn,

You are persistent! 8 entries in all! What a passion! You seem to be every ready to repeat, ad nauseum, your opinions, your assertions, your will, whilst frivolously dismissing others who may not see the world or SNC as you.

I was hoping my previous entry would be accepted as a conclusion to this thread, but no, you just had to have another rant, administer yet another dose of your discontent. Once again you completely misunderstood much of what I said; yet this didn't deter you from homing in once again, 'to right the wrong' [my quotes].

I played OTB chess at a fairly high level, both league, match play, and tournaments. During OTB play I witnessed at first hand, players in conversation related to their game. No one was ever sanctioned, no one was ever, 'kicked out'. Could it be you have seen players exchanging comments during the course of a serious game? That you have seen them been, '... kicked out'? If not, then you are merely making maudlin speculation.

I refer you to FIDE Laws of Chess: Article 12: The conduct of the players. Player engaged in conversation during a game are NOT mentioned. Article 12.5. comes closest, it says: 'It is forbidden to distract or annoy the opponent in any manner whatsoever; this includes the persistent offer of a draw.'. So you'll be surprised to learn, players can, if they so wish, 'chat in an OTB game'. They could have a tacit understanding to confer with one another at any point in the game. Always a good idea to check your facts before making such rigid and categorical statements Reyn!

For many years I also played postal CC, but that being so is not the issue, the points I made in this thread clearly, and exclusively, relate to the game of correspondence chess .... as played on SNC!

I wish you'd pause a while and read more carefully what I and others have written! But, just for you Reyn! Like everyone on SNC I know:
1. The primary function of SNC is for 'people' to play chess
2. Stan provides the option for players to swap messages during each move ... if they wish!
3. Some may not be fluent in English (many have excellent second language skills!). In that unlikely event we (me and my opponent!) usually play and chat as best we can! No compulsion, no expectations! For the most part just friendly 'chat'!

Emails: Yet again, you jump to soon! Given your persistent and adversarial approach I anticipated you might have suggested the use of emails, and NOT that you already had! Rather than your usual reflex response I suggest you try to; read, pause, read again, pause, reflect ... read again, go to bed and think on it awhile ... as I have!

I wonder how many non-subscribers will be persuaded by your evangelic polemic to, 'put their hand in their pocket'? Your sense of right, your sense of value, may not be theirs. Having said that I'm sure all SNC players are most grateful to Stan for his tireless work and his continuing support.

The difference between you and I Reyn is: I know I'm blockhead, you are a blockhead and you don't know it!

Reyn, rather than go for '9' you might consider taking your own advice; 'Why not leave it there?'. I hope so. This thread seems to have run it's course.

[reyn]

bh said:

I wonder how many non-subscribers will be persuaded by your evangelic polemic to, 'put their hand in their pocket'? Your sense of right, your sense of value, may not be theirs. Having said that I'm sure all SNC players are most grateful to Stan for his tireless work and his continuing support.

I'm sure that I will have convinced nobody. I was stating a fact. It costs Stan money to run this site, and it does not generate a profit.

When Stan first started this site, he asked no one to pay anything. It was totally out of his own pocket. That was no longer possible when he moved the site over to a dedicated server.

In an effort to defray costs, subscriptions were started in 2001. Unfortunately, it seems to me the numbers of subscribers has decreased in recent times.

In order to keep things going here, that trend needs to be reversed. Those of us who have been subscribers since 2001 have helped out and made it possible for others to remain playing here for "no cost".

For myself, I'm grateful that Stan has been able to carry on with his site with the small amount of financial support that currently exists.

And in future, if not, it will be a moot point whether others share my sense of right and value.