Latest Updates:
Poll
Poll Question: You can vote for several options
bars   pie

The Forum should be restricted to CP subscribers    
  9 (8.7%)
CP subscribers should have free access    
  20 (19.4%)
The Forum should be free to all, but with Adverts    
  10 (9.7%)
CP subscribers should see an ad-free version    
  16 (15.5%)
Everyone should pay a subscription to be a member    
  1 (1.0%)
Everyone pays but CP subscribers should pay less    
  1 (1.0%)
I want to see more quality posts by IM/GMs    
  22 (21.4%)
The Forum is fine as it is    
  24 (23.3%)




Total votes: 103
« Last Modified by: GMTonyKosten on: 07/20/11 at 11:00:35 »
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) ChessPub Forum – the way forward. (Read 30193 times)
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3042
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #31 - 07/04/11 at 23:38:45
Post Tools
hicetnunc wrote on 06/30/11 at 11:56:22:
A logical business model would be as follow :

- forum access is free for Chess Publishing subscribers
- other members are required to pay a forum subscription to access the great content here (maybe 7€/month, or something like that)
- Tony grants free access to his pick of the best forum contributors who are not already Chesspublishing members  Smiley

Yes, that makes a lot of sense to me.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3042
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #30 - 07/04/11 at 23:37:41
Post Tools
Quote:
the forum is in no way connected to resident DJs, rather running on its own. so why make posters pay for a value that mainly comes from themselves ?

Please have a look at my first 3 posts to see why.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jupp53
God Member
*****
Offline


be

Posts: 850
Location: Frankfurt/Main
Joined: 01/04/09
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #29 - 07/03/11 at 20:37:11
Post Tools
Wasn't it Henry Ford saying something: Half of my marketing is thrown out of the window and I would pay excellent for the one telling me which half.

The forum is marketing for the subscription. Without the forum I would not have subscribed and it gives me the feeling: There's a place where I can ask or propose something, when necessary.
  

Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002.
Dum spiro spero. Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
zoo
Ex Member


Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #28 - 07/03/11 at 20:16:53
Post Tools
- free to read and pay to write is enough, at least you can  farm the "me and my style" variety.
- as opposite to another post, I would suggest to reserve the search function to non-payers only.
- chances are that this forum turns dead the minute it becomes paying. Year after year, you made a great tool of the paying sections by giving time-to-market opening analysis, often more spirited than YB. However the forum is in no way connected to resident DJs, rather running on its own. so why make posters pay for a value that mainly comes from themselves ? If the problem is that you don't have enough income to pay the DJs, perhaps you should first add "paying value" to the forum, e.g. by distinguisinq "outstanding threads" and have a DJ make a sum-up in the forum section (first free, then paying). If the forum must pay for DJs, they must work for the forum.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
hicetnunc
Full Member
***
Offline


"Do something scary every
day"

Posts: 195
Location: Paris, France
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #27 - 06/30/11 at 11:56:22
Post Tools
A logical business model would be as follow :

- forum access is free for Chess Publishing subscribers
- other members are required to pay a forum subscription to access the great content here (maybe 7€/month, or something like that)
- Tony grants free access to his pick of the best forum contributors who are not already Chesspublishing members  Smiley
  

43 yo, 2000 elo
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3042
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #26 - 06/30/11 at 11:52:41
Post Tools
Lou_Cyber wrote on 06/28/11 at 15:16:07:
The forum is great, but the core of chesspub are the regular updates. Therefore you should try to make every forum member a subscriber.

Yes, that is another possibility. A bit hard on good Forum contributors who can't afford the sub, but it is certainly worth serious consideration.

TopNotch wrote on 06/27/11 at 21:20:48:
Create an FAQ, although I bet these questions will still find their way to the main boards.


I doubt many new members would bother to read it, we could also add something to the sign-up agreement, but again who ever bothers to read these? Roll Eyes
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Lou_Cyber
Full Member
***
Offline


"I didn´t understand that.
It must be true."

Posts: 237
Location: Rendsburg
Joined: 01/28/05
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #25 - 06/28/11 at 15:16:07
Post Tools
The forum is great, but the core of chesspub are the regular updates. Therefore you should try to make every forum member a subscriber. Possible ways:

- Only subscribers are allowed to post, use the search functions etc. unlimited. Free members might be restricted to 1 post per day, no search, no diagrams, no whatever.

- Create a closed forum only for subscribers, if only for one thread on each game mentioned in the updates. Exclusive access to these discussions might create a flow toward more subscriptions.
One additional benefit: Due to the copyright of Chesspub so far we rarely discuss the annotations in the forum. Often valuable ideas and comments are only sent to the authors by email. In a closed forum we could discuss freely (though this might scare away some of your authors).  Wink

- Keep the forum free for subscribers. I HATE to pay for any extras ... i´d rather accept a rise for subscriptions in general than have another "forum section" to subscribe to. Keep it simple and clean, this should make chesspub more attractive for new subscribers. 
  

If you try, you may lose. If you don´t try, you have lost.
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
TopNotch
God Member
*****
Offline


I only look 1 move ahead,
but its always the best

Posts: 1917
Joined: 01/04/03
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #24 - 06/27/11 at 21:20:48
Post Tools
Smyslov_Fan wrote on 06/27/11 at 13:17:07:
As a reader, I am tired of the endlessly repetitive repertoire questions too.

But as a moderator, I recognise that these endlessly repetitive questions are asked so often because they are of critical importance to many of the people here. The general chess discussion group, which I moderate, is the place for such questions. It may be tiresome for the stronger players to see these questions, but I believe they deserve to be made.
I would like to see a separate section just for those questions. That way, players who don't like them can stay away from that section entirely while those who find such lines of questioning useful can gravitate toward them. But just because we (the people posting in this particular thread) may find them boringly redundant doesn't mean they should be censored.

It is also possible to review the rules for chit chat. But I believe that censorship should be performed with a light touch, not an ironclad fist. As a moderator, I have deleted or censored many offensive or inappropriate posts. I have kept many more alive that dealt with controversial (non-chess related) topics. Many of the regulars here contribute to that section. Perhaps we could revisit the rules.

For instance, should reincarnation comments not be allowed simply because the great majority of us find them laughably ludicous? I can't think of a legitimate reason to censor such comments. 

If the censorship test is "laughably ludicrous", then there are many chess-related comments that would also be mercilessly censored. Rather, we can either ignore those comments that we find to be stupid or ridiculous (but not offensive) or we can try to answer them.

Personally, I tend to ignore the "laughably ludicrous" comments. If they aren't offensive, they shouldn't be censored. My personal test is if the comment could survive the censorship of something like BBC's news forum, I will allow it.


Create an FAQ, although I bet these questions will still find their way to the main boards.

Tops Smiley
  

The man who tries to do something and fails is infinitely better than he who tries to do nothing and succeeds - Lloyd Jones Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Zwischenzugzwang
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing
& chess pubs!

Posts: 380
Location: Zotzenbach
Joined: 06/14/11
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #23 - 06/27/11 at 13:37:46
Post Tools
Hello everybody!

Quote GMTonyKosten: "So we will need to address the question 'how can we make it easier to find that information?'
Although I have been loathe to do this, I am beginning to think that we might need to increase the number of sections, mostly by further sub-dividing the current ones. It might also be possible to add tags, or use ECO codes, but implementing this would be problematic.
On a slightly technical note I would also like to move to a faster, more secure (and unfortunately more expensive!) server with more bandwidth." - End Quote

Tony, I guess the tags you've mentioned are something like key words!? If there isn't a software internal possibility to tag a thread with keywords, anybody starting a new thread might give one or two reasonable key words in the thread's header (Stefan's suggestion about ECO codes has probably the same intention).

It would be in the "thread starter's" own interest to make the keywords as reasonable as possible, as that would increase the likelihood for that thread to be found and / or identified (and consequently commented).

The ECO code has the advantage that it is available to everybody who has internet access, but, as mentioned at different places, the whole system is dated. So another possibility were to use the taxonomy developed inside ChessPublishing - quite general ("1.d4 d5"), more detailed ("QGA"), or highly detailed ("QGA/2"). (Of course, as we don't want to exclude non-members from the forum, they would need a free access link somewhere to this taxonomy, which shouldn't take very long to develop (just copying it from the pdf-books.)

Concerning books, the key words might be author, title, maybe year of publication. Again: The better the key words are (spelling, completeness), the higher the likelihood of being found.

I don't know if there's a possibility to give different priority levels to threads. If there is, threads with a very specific topic (e.g. "QGA/2") could get a higher priority than more generall topics ("Kings Indian") and those a higher priority than totally generell topics (I like GabrielGale's wording, so Quote: "I don't know whether to play the Caro, Sicilian, Petroff, become a Catholic, or flagellate myself with a length of knotted rope. Which is best?" - End Quote)
- they might be higher in the list of threads, they might remain longer in the system (btw, after how many years will a thread be deleted?), they might be highlighted the one or the other way.

The priority status might be awarded by the moderators which shouldn't be too much work (according to my (limited)observation so far, there aren't very many new threads per day), and it would definitely be enough to do that once a day. The rules for them would be quite simple and no subject of discussion: Something like "QGA/2" would have priority A, "QGA" priority B, "1.d4 d5" priority C, no keyword at all priority D (or ZZZ). A combination of keywords might also lower the priority, e.g. "QGA/2, QGA3" would end up with priority B - a reason to select exactly one detailed key word.

To avoid the hijacking of "good" keywords, the moderators might be entitled to simply remove them from a thread, if they don't match the thread's content - no keyword at all, consequently priority D.

So the serious users of the forum would get a tool for improving it's self-organisation, whose results might also attract the "selctionistas'" (I cannot really believe that is their "official term"?) attention who might make better use of it by checking and maybe using some of the analysises provided in the forum.

If all that would work (well, maybe I'm sometimes a little naive concerning both technical possibilities und human behaviour  Undecided), the number of sections might remain the same, which might also decrease the need for a new server - (no new server --> no additional costs --> no horrible blinking adds  Smiley). Coming back to the quote from the beginning, I can't evaluate the security of the existing server, but I don't see a speed problem in the forum.

Best regards,

Zwischenzugzwang
  

What do people mean when they say "Chess is the pawn of the soul"?
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #22 - 06/27/11 at 13:17:07
Post Tools
As a reader, I am tired of the endlessly repetitive repertoire questions too.

But as a moderator, I recognise that these endlessly repetitive questions are asked so often because they are of critical importance to many of the people here. The general chess discussion group, which I moderate, is the place for such questions. It may be tiresome for the stronger players to see these questions, but I believe they deserve to be made.

I would like to see a separate section just for those questions. That way, players who don't like them can stay away from that section entirely while those who find such lines of questioning useful can gravitate toward them. But just because we (the people posting in this particular thread) may find them boringly redundant doesn't mean they should be censored.

It is also possible to review the rules for chit chat. But I believe that censorship should be performed with a light touch, not an ironclad fist. As a moderator, I have deleted or censored many offensive or inappropriate posts. I have kept many more alive that dealt with controversial (non-chess related) topics. Many of the regulars here contribute to that section. Perhaps we could revisit the rules.

For instance, should reincarnation comments not be allowed simply because the great majority of us find them laughably ludicous? I can't think of a legitimate reason to censor such comments. 

If the censorship test is "laughably ludicrous", then there are many chess-related comments that would also be mercilessly censored. Rather, we can either ignore those comments that we find to be stupid or ridiculous (but not offensive) or we can try to answer them.

Personally, I tend to ignore the "laughably ludicrous" comments. If they aren't offensive, they shouldn't be censored. My personal test is if the comment could survive the censorship of something like BBC's news forum, I will allow it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stefan Buecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1381
Location: Germany
Joined: 02/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #21 - 06/27/11 at 11:42:57
Post Tools
Bibs wrote on 06/27/11 at 00:07:21:
Agree totally there. Leech, leech, leech. Dreary.
1. "I have a 4 year old 1850 student who needs something versus the French. Tell me."
2. "I don't know whether to play the Caro, Sicilian, Petroff, become a Catholic, or flagellate myself with a length of knotted rope. Which is best?"

Further agree: need better, more active moderation. Mostly in idiot-removal. Two obvious ones come to mind.

I can only agree with GabrielGale and Bibs. In particular with this observation made by GabrielGale:

Quote:
[...] lately the postings are not as interesting as before. (I wnet back to the beginning of most sections and read the threads. Very educational for a novice like me. But I noticed that a number of older subscribers are not postings as much as before. [...] I feel there are not enough discussions of concrete variations as before.

I had the same impression. The percentage of posts about concrete variations is in decline. - Having to pay a small fee would already keep away many of those 4-year-olds. There should also be more moderators, with clear duties (maybe even adding ECO codes to opening threads, which would make it easier to find a variation?). Clear forum rules would help a lot ("When you start a new opening thread, don't forget to add the ECO code", "no personal insults", "no discriminating of openings", "no spam", "no cheerleading for illegal downloads of copyrighted works", etc. etc.).

Quote:
Perhaps Tony can clarify whether the plan is for 1) a totally closed subscriber only (ie only subscribers can view and post); 2) partially closed subscriber only (ie only subscriber can post but everyone can view).

You forgot the third option: 3) those who are not willing to contribute have to pay (more).
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2099
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #20 - 06/27/11 at 00:07:21
Post Tools
GabrielGale wrote on 06/26/11 at 23:30:20:
My apologies for the length of this post but I am bit uncertain about this direction that ChessPub Forum is taking. I thought I need to provide some feedback from a novice former and future subscriber. Perhaps Tony can clarify whether the plan is for 1) a totally closed subscriber only (ie only subscribers can view and post); 2) partially closed subscriber only (ie only subscriber can post but everyone can view).

For my part I was a subscriber to ChessPub but no longer as I realised I cannot keep up with the monthly updates and my chessic strength is not at the level where I require such up to date info. But I am planning to subscribe again. However, from day 1,  I have enjoyed the Forum albeit lately the postings are not as interesting as before. (I wnet back to the beginning of most sections and read the threads. Very educational for a novice like me. But I noticed that a number of older subscribers are not postings as much as before. Not sure whether they have moved on or they are increasingly put off by the postings. I would be very sad not to see contributions from Topnotch (still haven't figured out who he is, someone send me a PM), Bibs, Black Widow (?), Alumbrado, Slates et al. But I enjoyed some of the present ones such as those which described in concrete terms openings and variations pitched at all levels (I remember I read about the Archangelsk Var on ChessPub Forum first), eg, the current Modern after I Nf3 thread is quite interesting (thanks to BPaulsen, Glenn Snow, Smyslov_Fan, Kylemeister and also to TN, Amenaitos, MnB, Stigma, Micawber, dom, and even Markovich et al for their contributions). I feel there are not enough discussions of concrete variations as before. If as is being stated by many chess coaches that opening theory is becoming 20-25 moves deep, then I think there is still lots of scope to discuss openings and perhaps now their opening/middlegame plans strategy. Too many "help me to improve including repertoire help" turning this from an opening discussion forum into a chess improvement forum.

Input from sections authors and/or other GMs and IMs are think very much welcomed but not sure whether the economics of return are a sufficient incentive. A suggestion: Perhaps Tony can try to "entice" the younger/more junior GMs who are trying to establish their names/reputations to contribute to the forum? Some of these younger GMs are very concrete in their opening analyses and very enthusiastic as well. For example, Chessbase has Anish Giri, Chessdom had Fabiano Caruana contributing for a while to their discussion board and they also have GM Ipatov et al.

In conclusion, I would opt for the following:
1) My obvious preference is for ChessPub to remain as it is but probably with more moderation in the direction to prevent the proliferation of similar and same threads and perhaps some thought given to organisation of sections and threads. However, if not possible, then,
2) ChessPub Forum should be half-closed ie only ChessPub subscribers can post but the threads are open to general public;
3) A ChessPub subscriber should have free subscription to the sections he/she is a subscriber. A Gold subscriber would obviously have access to all sections.


Agree totally there. Leech, leech, leech. Dreary.
1. "I have a 4 year old 1850 student who needs something versus the French. Tell me."
2. "I don't know whether to play the Caro, Sicilian, Petroff, become a Catholic, or flagellate myself with a length of knotted rope. Which is best?"

Further agree: need better, more active moderation. Mostly in idiot-removal. Two obvious ones come to mind.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GabrielGale
Senior Member
****
Offline


Who was Thursday?

Posts: 466
Location: Sydney
Joined: 02/28/08
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #19 - 06/26/11 at 23:30:20
Post Tools
My apologies for the length of this post but I am bit uncertain about this direction that ChessPub Forum is taking. I thought I need to provide some feedback from a novice former and future subscriber. Perhaps Tony can clarify whether the plan is for 1) a totally closed subscriber only (ie only subscribers can view and post); 2) partially closed subscriber only (ie only subscriber can post but everyone can view).

For my part I was a subscriber to ChessPub but no longer as I realised I cannot keep up with the monthly updates and my chessic strength is not at the level where I require such up to date info. But I am planning to subscribe again. However, from day 1,  I have enjoyed the Forum albeit lately the postings are not as interesting as before. (I wnet back to the beginning of most sections and read the threads. Very educational for a novice like me. But I noticed that a number of older subscribers are not postings as much as before. Not sure whether they have moved on or they are increasingly put off by the postings. I would be very sad not to see contributions from Topnotch (still haven't figured out who he is, someone send me a PM), Bibs, Black Widow (?), Alumbrado, Slates et al. But I enjoyed some of the present ones such as those which described in concrete terms openings and variations pitched at all levels (I remember I read about the Archangelsk Var on ChessPub Forum first), eg, the current Modern after I Nf3 thread is quite interesting (thanks to BPaulsen, Glenn Snow, Smyslov_Fan, Kylemeister and also to TN, Amenaitos, MnB, Stigma, Micawber, dom, and even Markovich et al for their contributions). I feel there are not enough discussions of concrete variations as before. If as is being stated by many chess coaches that opening theory is becoming 20-25 moves deep, then I think there is still lots of scope to discuss openings and perhaps now their opening/middlegame plans strategy. Too many "help me to improve including repertoire help" turning this from an opening discussion forum into a chess improvement forum.

Input from sections authors and/or other GMs and IMs are think very much welcomed but not sure whether the economics of return are a sufficient incentive. A suggestion: Perhaps Tony can try to "entice" the younger/more junior GMs who are trying to establish their names/reputations to contribute to the forum? Some of these younger GMs are very concrete in their opening analyses and very enthusiastic as well. For example, Chessbase has Anish Giri, Chessdom had Fabiano Caruana contributing for a while to their discussion board and they also have GM Ipatov et al.

In conclusion, I would opt for the following:
1) My obvious preference is for ChessPub to remain as it is but probably with more moderation in the direction to prevent the proliferation of similar and same threads and perhaps some thought given to organisation of sections and threads. However, if not possible, then,
2) ChessPub Forum should be half-closed ie only ChessPub subscribers can post but the threads are open to general public;
3) A ChessPub subscriber should have free subscription to the sections he/she is a subscriber. A Gold subscriber would obviously have access to all sections.
  

http://www.toutautre.blogspot.com/
A Year With Nessie ...... aka GM John Shaw's The King's Gambit (http://thekinggambit.blogspot.com.au/)
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2099
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #18 - 06/26/11 at 12:42:08
Post Tools
Google ads: intrusive, hideous.

As it happens, was ages before I realised that non-subscribers could write. I just assumed it was part of the package.

I appreciate the desire to make money, but aside from that, appears quite okay as it is. Though would like moderators to be a bit more thoroughgoing with persistent crass idiocy. But that is another matter....

Perhaps moderators could be paid from the ads...?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3042
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: ChessPub Forum – the way forward.
Reply #17 - 06/26/11 at 08:42:50
Post Tools
Daniel wrote on 06/25/11 at 23:40:23:
the message boards I know that do this are huge, have lots of trolls, and generate income by banning them and having them reregister.  We don't appear to be big enough or have persistent enough trolls to do this.

LOL
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo