TalJechin wrote on 04/29/10 at 11:49:18:


Now there's an idea.  Thanks for pointing that out.

I can't do it right now, but I can split this topic and have a separate one on organizing the forum.

Willempie wrote on 04/28/10 at 22:28:02:

When you write your post on the 'my little forum' software there is a box for 'Tags'. Whether we could get everyone to add the ECO code every time they posted is another matter!

I just had a thought: on the other Forum you can use 'tags', is it possible to tag posts according to ECO, say, and cross-reference them?

Markovich wrote on 04/28/10 at 13:55:34:


I won't discuss the suggestion that either there's BS or ECO-style classification.

One downside is that with more detailed classification, more topics will defy classification because they are too broad. Already, we have topics that bridge several sections and are being dumped in the general chess section. 

One way around this problem is to have subsections in the opening sections that are loosely based on broad ECO codes. For instance in the French, there can be a general French section, and sections on the Advanced, Exchange and rare French,
Tarrasch, Steinitz, Classical, and Winawer.

There should also be a section on French players in other openings.  This last subsection appears to be quite a popular theme regardless of opening.  For topics that bridge different French Openings, such as the Universal System or French Heroes, the general French section would still exist.

The posters here are mostly extremely capable analysts who won't be confused by where to enter their original post.  But such classification would require the moderators to actively monitor the threads.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 04/27/10 at 17:14:23:


I meant software thinking that perhaps software existed that would facilitate some sort of cross-classification of posts by sonething-or-other, in our case ECO code (or similar).  But I agree that even if such a thing existed, it would be both confusing and annoying at first.

In some ways it goes to the purposes of the forum.  If it's really just a lot of B.S., then it doesn't really matter if 27 threads exist asking how best to play against the French Tarrasch.  If however you want the forum to be a research resource, I think we need some sort of way to classify the threads better.  One solution would be a much more detailed topic list, that is true; I'm not sure what the downside of that would be.  You'd still have trouble with contributors here maintaining thread discipline; there's a certain tendency to post under the wrong heading already, and also a tendency for threads to wander off into "wrong" theory.

Smyslov_Fan wrote on 04/26/10 at 14:44:56:


Me too.  But I wouldn't be willing to volunteer my time to sort out all those old threads.  That would be a labor fit for Hercules, and I doubt that even he could do it.  The Augean stables smelled better than a lot of those old threads.

Further I would not advise anyone to undertake such a task unless the structure of the site were to change to facilitate easier reference, e.g. by ECO code.  Why bother reorganizing when the same thing will happen again?