Good grief, it's 8-16 and the last post to the KID board was on 8-7.   

The curfew tolls the knell of parting day. 
The lowing herd winds slowly o'er the lea. 
The ploughman homeward plods his weary way, 
And leaves this board to darkness, and to me.

kingscrusher wrote on 08/04/06 at 10:43:58:


Well, hopefully it was a friendly reminder, but the boards suffer greatly from off-topic posts.  The only way to fix that is by informal policing by the people who find threads interesting, I think.

Quote:


You can actually do this already.  Click on the name of any member, and then one can view his or her last posts.  For yourself, such a link is under your "profile" (see the buttons at the top of the screen).  For other members, you can click on their name wherever you find it, or else use the members button to browse.

One can also search old posts (and in particular do so by member name), but I think the above feature is the one you are looking for.

Hi all

I am the webmaster of www.chessworld.net which has reasonably active forums. I would like to offer my insights - take them or leave them.

1) Too many forums perhaps?! Sometimes too many forums can be a bad thing - it's like lots of different pigeon holes or rooms to check. Perhaps the "Latest posts independent of forum" must be highlighted more- and in big text?! The overhead of seeing the latest posts in each individual forum is like hard work - like asking someone to open the door of 50 different rooms. 

Also is there another way to group the openings - e.g. by pawn structure?! 

Some of the most popular forums as far as Servers go, are just labelled "Chess" and have a mix of all chess subjects under the sun. The equivalent here would be highlighting the "Latest posts" a bit more. Maybe:-

Latest posts (all)

Latest posts in Open positions
Latest posts in Closed positions
Latest posts in Semi-open positions
Latest posts by GM's
etc

The RSS is a good innovation, but still does not give me a comfortable context

2) Posting "off-topic" becomes very easy to do - I did this in my last post, and was discouraged with the reply that it was in the wrong thread. The energy I used in posting seemed to be not appreciated. Okay, my points may have been rubbish but still. 

3) I can't find where on earth I posted to anyway - I know I posted to the Nimzo indian forum about a Rest of World game position in the Queens Indian, but where was my more general post made?! This might be a side effect of too many forums. Perhaps a "My posts" would be good. Chessgames.com which has kind of forums has a thing where it shows any games which your comment had replies. This is really handy. I don't know where I posted my last post to.

I hope these points may help these forums here. 

Best wishes
Tryfon

blueguitar322 wrote on 07/31/06 at 13:32:54:

I like this idea!  

Some of these posts might contain links to discussion threads where a particular line has been discussed, thereby providing a kind of index which would make older threads easier to find.

I completely understand and didn't mean to "call you out," as the rereading of my post seemed to imply.  It does strike me, however, that the successful games of this ilk are those that tackle lines with minimal existing theory.  Side lines and sub-variations should draw more people...

Would anybody be interested in taking up the White side of the Smyslov Slav (1 d4 d5 2 c4 c6 3 Nf3 Nf6 4 Nc3 dxc4 5 a4 Na6)?  This is a line I'm always coming back to.  I recall somewhere that Smyslov_Fan has enjoyed success with both sides of the Smyslov Slav.  In my books, it qualifies as one of those lines that could really benefit with some careful analysis if anyone would like to take up the White side...

Touché!

I rather hope the analysis is "well done" anyway...

I think this is a case of be careful what you wish for.  I've had more free time than usual lately and I positively can't keep up with the interesting posts here at the Chesspub!  (Like to see a Chesspub bar and grill.)  

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 07/02/06 at 23:45:49:

Smyslov_Fan,
I'll start a thread for our game tomorrow night or early Thursday if this works for you.  

Do you want to start with 1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 or maybe add a few more moves and start with the position after 4. e5 Nfd7 5. f4 c5 6. Nf3 Nc6 (or even a more specific line)?  Either way works for me.

BTW, in serious games I've only played Steinitz lines with 5. Nf3 so far.  My repertoire had a lot of theory dodging lines when I started playing about six years ago ( following a >20 yr hiatus).  Over time, I've been upgrading my repertoire bit by bit with more ambitious/robust lines.  However, I'm pretty comfortable with 5. f4 Steinitz lines (with a fair bit of recent experience in ICC rapid/blitz games).

I'll wait til I hear your preference regarding the starting moves before putting up the thread.

Cheers,
Ostap

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 07/04/06 at 01:00:37:

I may not be much help to you, as I only play this from the white side. Real Frenchies play the Winawer

PS for accents switch you keyboard to dutch iso US american. Then ie a ` followed by an e will give è

If you chose 7...a6 against the Steinitz, I will.
This dead board looks quite alive ...

986 wrote on 07/03/06 at 21:05:21:


I will start a game thread in the French Section middle of next week (around July 12).  This will give me time to get my Dragon game with Scholar underway and finish up some other ongoing stuff (some of which has nothing to do with chess...  ).

Ostap,

I'd love to play the Black side of the French Steinitz or Classical after 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3 Nf6 whenever you're ready.

Take your time and get back to me.  If we do this before school starts back up I should have plenty of time to come up with some thoughtful (though perhaps wrong-headed) play.

Cheers!

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/30/06 at 18:51:17:

Although I play 1...Nf6 against 1.d4 aiming for Nimzo or Benoni (against Nf3), I often find myself in a Slav or Semi-Slav when White delays c2-c4 (e.g., Anti-Colle lines based on ...d5 and ...Bf5 often lead into Slav).  So I might be interested in a game starting with 1.d4 d5 2.c4 c6 since I have a little bit of experience through the abovementioned transpositions and am interested in becoming more familar with the Slav.  I think that I should have sufficient database/book resources to compensate for my relatively limited experience - and hopefully there'll be some other participants.

Quote:

I have some favorites here, of course.  Right now I'm kind of partial to the Sveshnikov Sicilian (which I'm still learning but have done pretty well with thus far).  I also like playing 1..e5 and have some experience with the French.

Quote:

Since I play 1.e4 and face the French Defense fairly often, this seems like a good choice if you would prefer this to the Taimanov which I'm also happy to try.  

Maybe we can start figuring out if there's a specific line in the French Defense we'd both like to explore and start from there.  I'm open to suggestions, but as a starting point let's consider either Steinitz or Winawer lines arising from 1.e4 e6 2.d4 d5 3.Nc3.  

As for timing, maybe starting in about 2-3 weeks would be good.  I might be taking on the White side of the Yugoslav Dragon in a week or so and would like to get that one underway before jumping into a second game.  If someone else takes up the White side of the Yugoslav I'll be ready sooner.

In any event, thanks for your interest and I'm definitely looking forward to getting a game started with you.

Scholar wrote on 06/30/06 at 00:38:41:

There are others more qualified than I to take up the white side of this line.  However, if there are no other takers I'm glad to do it - if nothing else it will be a great opportunity to dig deeply and learn more about this opening.  I've got a few things going on right now, but will try to start a game thread in a week or so.  Should someone else take up the challenge in the meantime, I will be sure to participate.  Thanks.

Cheers,
Ostap

Scholar wrote on 06/30/06 at 00:38:41:


I'd play the White side, if only to find out what's going on.  I'm no expert on the Blumenfeld except to say that I once beat an Hungarian master out of the opening.  I made a terrible gaffe, but he didn't notice and I was lucky enough to take advantage of the situation.   

How about it, HgMan and Scholar?

HgMan-Willempie have started their game discussing the Advanced Caro:

http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1151070318

I'd be interested in, and will try to contribute to, a similar game in any of the following lines:

Sicilian Sveshnikov (any 9.Bxf6 or 9.Nd5 line, but earlier deviations (e.g. 7.Nd5) are also interesting)

Sicilian Najdorf/Scheveningen lines with Bc4

Yugoslav Dragon (with 9.0-0-0)

Ruy Lopez, Marshall Attack (the 15.Qf3 line mentioned by Smyslov_Fan looks interesting)
http://www.chesspub.com/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1150397393

Ruy Lopez, Zaitsev Variation

Modern Benoni (especially Taimanov/Flick Knife line, but others are also interesting)

Scandanavian Icelandic Gambit (this one might be too marginal to generate sufficient interest, though).

Semi-Slav Moscow or Botvinnik Variation

The Veresov Attack (this one also might be too marginal to generate sufficient interest)

parisestmagique wrote on 06/27/06 at 14:56:11:

I was aware that dragon players are theoryphiles, but isnt analysing until move 9000 a bit too much even for you guys?

HgMan wrote on 06/26/06 at 17:28:29:


Again, good idea HgMan!

Or, as a series of commercials say:

BRILLIANT!

It would be great to see numerous games going on here at the same time!  As long as a couple of members start a game in a topical variation I'm sure others will contribute analysis from time to time.  And even if they don't the players will learn something and more discussion may follow later.

I like Smyslov_Fan's idea, but Frendo's right: we only need one thread per game.

I'd be willing to take the Black side of the Nimzo, Semi-Tarrasch, or Caro-Kann...

Inn, 

I think you might be right about the Slav Noteboom.  I don't mind taking the White side if you want the Black side.  If we're going to do this as teams of analysts, I suggest the following:

We create three different threads in the Slav section:

A) The game thread, in which anyone can comment

B) White's game thread, in which players are honor-bound to play only for White

C) Black's game thread, ditto.

I also suggest that we can use databases but not playing programs.  Of course, this is optional and impossible to enforce, but I'd like to see humans deal with the position.   

What do you think?

I'd play the black side of d4...I'd be happy to play the Blumenfeld or Nimzo (or even the Budapest...), though in each case it's because I'm trying to learn the opening (either the nonrefuted bits of the Blumenfeld accepted, or some of the c5 lines in the Nimzo).  It would be good if there was a critical mass of interested players for both sides...maybe someone should take a vote on which openings people would be interested in studying this way, and then start a game in the opening which gets the most votes (so that, ideally, it doesn't just turn into a corr. game between two people).

I'd be happy to contest a CK with either white or black. It maybe a very nice idea for the 1..e4 forum as frankly I am a bit bored with all the hippo's, Scandinavians and Alekhines, though sometimes they're usefull for ideas in my white games.

The number of members online at any given time seems to be rising.  I've been struck by how many people are online when I log on.  But the number of posts does seem to be diminishing.  It may be that the regulars are running out of things to say, but there is a real dirth of good topics.  SF mentioned the French being on life support: well, look at the current lines under discussion.  I'm not sure that one of them could be considered a main line, and when someone does post a question about the MacCutcheon or the Winawer, it sinks down the list fast.  If the Latvian and BDG are anything to go by, the majority of active posters seem concerned with marginal openings that are dubious at best.  The Scandinavian is more popular than the Caro-Kann.  I've tried to start a number of discussions on main line Caro material, and no one has answered.

Maybe it's time to try some more discussion-format games.  I'm no BDG fan, but I thought the games there were very interesting.  Those were among the most productive posts in really getting under the skin of the opening...

Yes, judging from the number of posts, the board is less active than before.  However, if you look back at the posts before the big crash in late 2005, you’ll see a lot of silly postings by a few prolific people who apparently spent their time congratulating each other for reaching Olympus (that’s what they called reaching 500 posts).  Does anyone want that type of foolishness to reappear?  And, most people probably would prefer not to be bombarded with inane jabbering about cult openings like the BDG.  So, in one sense, the current board could be viewed as an improvement over the self-congratulators, the cultists, the one-word spammers, and other assorted fruitcakes.

yes this board is abit deader than before... but still not completely dead!~ 

Perhaps many posters, having made 500 posts, have said all they wanted to say about chess.

How ironic would it have been if no-one had replied to this topic? 

Seriously, at the moment I would agree that the board seems less active than ever, but that's probably because all the posts are concentrated on a few subjects. However, in the forum's heyday topics like the King's Gambit, Belgrade, Dragon and various others were seeing huge numbers of posts per day, whereas now it does appear that only the BDG is stirring enough people. 

The problem is that it's very hard to cater to newer players - if they want to discuss anything it is up to them to post a topic and await replies. The statistic that 60% of members do not post is somewhat worrying, however - if people like Adams are lurking on the forum, I'm sure it could cause a boom of activity if they contributed to some threads!

Even I thought so and let it pass. Perhaps, the word crap was the culprit. At hind sight, sure, it is in bad taste.

But, my post was not about democracy. Every known vocation in this world has evolved its own code of ethic or industry best practices as ERP guys put it. I have trouble believing a forum like this cannot evolve one while retaining quality AND broadening the participation base. That's the point I was making.

Good point, but I would prefer we don't get too personal here, I might have to start taking my Moderator role seriously! 

@Strptzr

Statistics is funny. Only about 75 members have posted 50 or more posts. Every 3rd post is from one of the top 10 posters and more than 60% of the members have never posted. 

But the problem is, chesspublishing.com is for advanced players. (I was given to understand that Adams and Svidler are members) Forum or the major portion of it, cannot be for absolute beginners, either. We don’t want to be discussing Mark De la Maza or Chess Master Vs Fridz or some such crap.

Yet, the forum needs to be less intimidating, if not out right friendly. The  question is, what to do? 

NB: Why do I have a feeling, you have something substantial to say and waiting for the discussions to take off? 

Yes, I think these things do go in 'waves', but maybe only two major 'waves', as judging from the number of people who join ChessPublishing each year, the Autumn & Winter period (in the Northern Hemisphere that is!) is by far the most popular for chess, far less people seem to be online in the Spring & Summer period (& who can blame them!) 
And as I only managed to get the Forum going again in January ...

Scholar wrote on 04/09/06 at 08:32:00:


Credo in nullum deum, etiamsi divinum me ipsem!

(I believe in no god, not even in my divine self!)

Interesting discussion. Thanks very much, I Need To Know, for the flattering mention! I'm actually still very much around, but haven't had time for many posts (at least not detailed ones) recently because of work demands. I'm self-employed, so my free time tends to fluctuate pretty wildly (OK, I admit it, I'm just disorganised!), but I guess this is true to varying degrees for most people.

I'm not sure what to think of the broader phenomenon. I do have the feeling things haven't picked up fully following the 'great crash', and yes, there are posters whom I'm sure we'd all like to see back. But I think also these things go in waves, so I'm reasonably sanguine about forum posts regaining their former depth and intensity before too long.

I don’t know, why do people consider me to be inactive. Who ever lists the missing regulars unfailingly include me. I posted more than 50 times in the past 30 days and that’s about my average. I do most of my postings from work and as such I don’t have access to database or pgn reader. So, unless there is some discussion in which I may know something already, my involvement may be  non existent.

In a public forum people joining and leaving is inevitable. Most of the guys I need to know mentions have displayed lot of energy and when they are not around, things don’t look the same. 

This site has lot of information and no matter how much you post, you can never pay more than what you get. Quite a few titled players and book authors post from time to time and I suspect strong players from all over the world lurk into the site on a regular basis. Number of guests online is always more than the number of members!

This site can be overwhelming and intimidating to new comers. They feel either inadequate or get too jumpy and rude. Both are bad for the forum. If the new comers take their time to settle down, get to know what’s going on and slowly get their feet wet, there will be steady inflow of new posters. 

Yep there is less discussion about analysis. I  replied to a line in the KI-bayonet attack recently
and received no comment at all. I don't attribute this to my brilliant analysis  .
At the same time I notice that the number of questions that ask for analysis has gone down in the last two months. So the opportunities to have an analytical discussion have decreased as well.

It certainly seems as if there is less posting.  I'm not sure if that's because people we lost after the great deletion (though you, Markovich, are an example of one who has trickled back), or if just that there are fewer interesting posts.  For me personally, there are fewer active topics of direct relevance.   

Or maybe you just feel bad that no one celebrated your 500th post

I might as well be discussing chess in a cemetery.  Where is everyone?  Gone off to Olympus?   

Is no one interested in chess anymore?  Also, there is very scant participation from the contributors, the way there used to be.