This is nice, Fencer talking about the future of BrainKing.

moistfinger:

I see, thanks.

I have an opponent who has been timing out for at least a day, but whose amount of vacation time remains unchanged. Why is this?

Aganju:

Thanks.

How do I set up a shogi tournament in which the players each give their opponent a handicap in one of two games?

happyjuggler0: Okay, thanks. If nothing happens, I'll try that.

Yesterday I won a tournament for which the prize was a one year rook-membership: Courage breeds victory! however, I'm still a pawn. Is there some cryptic sequence of hand gestures I'm expected to perform in order to activate the promised membership status?

Thanks.

Is the only way to stop an individual accepting games, from the waiting games page, to put them in blocked users?

Apparently I have 10 days vacation available, but it only lets me set them for this month, which is 5 days.

MadMonkey: It's just this site. I've got to admit, I dont understand how Chrome works. I'll ask my wife to translate it.

Thanks for the suggestions. Do I take it from this that the problem is not about my computer?

The site hasn't been letting me in until I hit the log in button 2-4 times, for about some small number of days. I thought this was because I installed a Skype update before closing the Firefox. But I've now thorown away both Skype and Firefox and after retrieving the Firefox I have the same story. Should I throw my computer through a window or should I tolerate a novel log in feature?

Error Safe came up when I tried to go to the tablut rules page, pretty much as Rabbitoid describes.

Not just Drive Cleaner, there's also Error Safe.

Pogonophora.

Not my problem.

I think in view of recent scandalous events it's time to review the success or otherwise of the global moderators. I assume the global moderator system was instituted as a stop-gap substitute service to provide for when none of the local moderators was online. This sounds reasonable enough but is it really necesary? Without globals a fight or a taboo word might remain unmoderated for a few hours on a public board, no great disaster as far as I can see but if such a situation can be avoided all well and good. However the problem associated with this system of prevention is that it encourages 'complete' and excessive policing. There is a tendency for humans to use/abuse the powers they are entrusted with to the limit with consequent psychological and moral deterioration. On the Gothic Chess board a few days ago there was what's usually termed a heated discussion, both the moderator, Walter Montego, and his supporting moderator, Andromedical, were online. Andromedical was active on the board at this point so there was no call for any interference from a global. (By their inherrent nature globals have less familiarity with the content and style of a board and it's frequent posters than do locals.) Nevertheless a global butted in with a trivial and patronising post as if they were a parent admonishing their kids or a teacher with a class of infants, not only is this uncalled for and irritating, it also undermines the position of the local moderators. Quite naturally Walter Montego resented this intrusion and warned the global, however, instead of apologising and backing off, this global became personally and emotionally involved. The situation quickly escalated and the globals removed Walter as moderator. For a moderator to be removed by a global because of personal reasons is completely unacceptable. After only a few months in this position the globals have developed a self-image as some kind of medievel royalty who trace their ancestors directly back to god and who cant be looked upon by mortal eyes without recompense for the insult. A day ago I asked in the Mod Squad "who removed Walter and why?", I have received no replies. This suggests that the globals think that they are above accounting for their actions and that they have an internal code of silence further isolating and "elevating" them. Recently a moderator was removed from the Poetry board. This moderator was new to the board and unfamiliar with it's content and the style of it's frequent posters, (just as globals are on boards of which they are not also the regular moderator), and this person was moderating intrusively, (just as the global did on the Gothic Chess board), if the globals stand by their decision to remove the moderator from Poetry then, to maintain consistency, the globals involved in the Gothic Chess board scandal should themselves be removed.

Can one change the priority of other people's bugs? If so, is that in itself a bug?

Forget it.

Is bug catagory 3 about game boards or discussion boards?

Thanks. I dont like any of those games so I never explored the page's function.

You mean I can define a default starting position at that page so as to avoid the necessity of setting up the position each time I start one of those games?

Read this page.

What the hell is this godawfull game editing page? It's all very well to ask me to translate this stuff but what the. . . . . . . .

Would somebody be kind enough to explain to me how the "game editors" page functions?

Thanks. Surprising.

How many people have brains and among those how many have a significant number and do people use them?

How about if posts are signed off LSRN? I thought Purple's "TNP" was just friendly solidarity and nothing to panic over.

Other way round.

When anybody makes repressive stuff under the cloak of whatever, there is no way that I can express the position from Aristotle in terms allowed by the moderators. So, just accept that your thinking is thousands of years defunct.

I guess Fencer was just exercising his freedom of speech thingy in the newsbox.

I dont see what's racist about it. Should Bernice's men only and women only ponds be disallowed as sexist? Should beginners tournaments be disallowed as ratingist?

A board game is an interactive social event, computers are incapable of play and under no circumstances should they be playing on a site for humans.

Sounds fair. How will you ensure the other participants are all aware of this proposal?

And this ties in with Trice's failure to announce Sumerian's computer's presence. . . . . .

I dont know how many players he's deceived, I took the liberty of assuming your figures were responsibly posted. The rest of my sentence independently stands.

I'm not talking about anyone's opinions but about Sumerian's behaviour and his attempts to justify it.

The behaviour of Sumerian is unacceptable, the arrogance of assuming the right to deceive "Hundreds" of players to test his computer is a clear betrayal of the trust required by a community such as BrainKing.

His purpose doesn't change a thing, his behaviour was in direct contravention of site rules. The lack of understanding is yours if you cant see that.

That's fine. This is a community and trust is an important foundation of it's structure.

It was Trice's responsibility to put the facts in the tournament description but it was Sumerian's responsibility to personally inform all the players who entered the tournament, and had there been any objections from other entrants, Sumerian should have left that tournament.

If he genuinely stated to his opponents that he wanted their help in testing his program I wouldn't object but that isn't what happened, is it?

He hasn't said it, he wrote it on his profile and it is still a breach of the rules.

It's a question of abuse of trust, membership of BrainKing implies not using computer assistance.

Why are you using this site? Test it at a site that allows computer.

Using computers is against the rules. The idea that it's the responsibility of other competitors to check whether or not anyone is admitting to breaking the rules is outrageous. What if a person admits on their profile to entering a tournament under several different names? Is that also okay because it's admitted? I dont see a problem with a computer user openly inviting an opponent to test the machine but the idea that it's the opponent's responsibility is ridiculous. I probably haven't read more than 15 profiles of all the members here and certainly dont want to start doing so. If I want to play with a computer I won't come to a site for humans, that's is obvious and any excuses about what's on a profile is eyewash.

It's nonsense to expect all entrants to tournaments to read the profiles of all the other entrants.

The "problem" is that your profile isn't compulsory reading. I suggest something like a news page on which statements such as that on your profile can be posted as public declarations.

I'd say almost everything is impossible.