[ps. Just out of curiousity, how did you discover that it's bscx?]

Because I know everything!

Oh, and if you do a search for a message, and when those messages come up, there is a link that says "show message in context" - that will put that message (BSCX=) as the first post showing the rest of the messages under it.

... since you asked.

BIG BAD WOLF: Hey, the message id and named anchor are already there. That's excellent! The only bit Fencer need do then is put that same link on the message itself, as suggested in the feature request.

For anyone who would like to know how to use BBW's method:
1) Do "Copy shortcut" on the Reply link of the target message.
2) Paste it into your new message (or Profile page or wherever).
3) Change the &brt= part to &bscx= ... and Bob's your uncle.
4) Optionally do the <a href="...">A better title</a> thing around the new link.

, that's super and just what I want.
Thanks


[ps. Just out of curiousity, how did you discover that it's bscx?]

playBunny: Yea, that would be nice.

Right now if you want to do that, you have to "trick" the system.

For example:

http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=3&bscx=383873

That link will take you to Board #3 (Feature request), and put the post #383873 (a post by me a little ways down) to the top of the list.

Of course that is a lot of work, but it should work if you REALLY want to do that.

In an number of discussion boards people have suggested reading "page 40" to find some information. That doesn't work except at the moment of posting and even then only for someone with the same number of messages per page as the poster. Another mistake of referral (and one that I've been making myself) is to use the timestamp of the message, but that's no good for anyone in a different timezone.

Hence, could there be a way to reference an earlier message or even better to be able to make a link to it?

One possible implementation is to display a Message Id (perhaps to the right of the Delete link) for textual references, eg "See message 9356". For the linking part of the request each message could be given a named anchor and the displayed Message Id could be a link to that anchor. This would have two benefits: firstly it could be 'Copy shortcut'ed for referencing elsewhere, and secondly, clicking on it would put that message at the top of the window.

Marfitalu: Of course, when the Spanish translation is finished.

Fencer: Yeah, and don't forget the created, but not started tournaments. They should be updated as well.

WhiteTower: Yes, it's already filed in the Bug Tracker :-)

Please update the new game page so that there is no upper limit of 2700 for filtering candidate players. Make it 3000 or 4000 at least, to cover any future freak situations :)

BIG BAD WOLF:

I wouldn't mind seeing the longest winning streaks then.

I would like to see the "Top 50 players" list expanded to include more players. Or manybe something like "you are in XXX'th place with an average BKR of XXXX" - that way people can see how close they are to making a list.

Same request goes for the "top player" section.

Third request is to make a tab from Statistics to go directly to the daily / all time move page. Instead of having to keep the link on our main page, I think it should also be included in the Statistics area - if not only a quick link to where the page is currently located.

I wuold like to play riffle chess, chess were capturing is done only buy taking the piece out. Also african chess would be great same as normal but elephant(rook) moves to 2 square every where if in a1 it can go a2 a3 b1 b2 b3 c1 c2 c3 and can jump over. Knight moves normally but because it is giraffe it can also it enemy whit it long neck. In f3 it can eat off the enemy on f7 or b3 of course over pieces. And bishop is normal exept it freeze the enemy around it (one square) if bishops freeze other bishop it can still move. King pawn and queen are normal.

Chaos: I love multi -player games.

LightningBolt: maybe less volcanoes would be an idea.
maybe a version were 2 volcanoes appear on the board in a random position.it could be called random espionage.

Fencer: I MEANT to make it a 10 wins match, and said in my invite message that it was, but I suppose I must have forgotten to check thwe right box. Oh well!! Never mind. We'll try again.

pgt: Yeah, looks like a single game to me as well. I do remember accepting a match though, wonder why? oh well.

grenv: That's a simple game, not a match.

Game ID: 989543

pgt: That's strange. Please give me the game ID.

I was playing a 10 wins game of Backgammon. I resigned the first game, expecting that the second game would then start, but unfortunately the entire game disappeared and I lost the match! Could we have a feature which allows resigning an individual game rather than the whole match?

Fencer: Neat!

AbigailII: Try it now.

A week or so ago, there was a request to replace the arrows in Amazons with something more stone-like, and Fencer responded with a counter-request, a suitable image. I think the stones used in PahTum would work well in Amazons.

Something to consider: when you are in long "X wins match" you could have completed many games of a certain type, yet 6 months may have elapsed since a result has been "counted". Recall individual games are not rated in the matches, just one final result.

You might want to avoid dropping active people who are not playing any games except those in matches.

I would like to request an easy way to see when I have finished a game in all the game types last. That way if I need to at least play a couple of games of a type I don't play that often - I can do that before the deadline reaches the time where I'm taken off the BKR list.

How about threads on the boards so we can have a decent conversation without being told off. It really isn't all that practical to move the conversation since you lose the history.

And a feature request on behalf of the moderators here - the ability to transfer a block of posts to a more appropriate board while leaving a post here giving a redirection link. That would work best if the link actually went to the first message in the discussion, though. A link to the board itself would be useless once other messages pushed the topic down. A stop-gap approach would be to give a link to the board and the date of the first message in the sequence. (And a Go To Date box wuld be handy then, lol)

Edited to remove further moderation discussion

I would love to see a espionage 4-player game :) It would be great if there was the possibility of teaming up; 2 players against 2 other players. All 4 with their own set up on one of the 4 sides of the board. The teammates can see eachother's pieces + the pieces they or their teammate discover.

This would create a unique game you can find nowhere else :)

I agree that a short discussion should probably be acceptable. Shorter especially, if it is a game rule sort of request, where the game has its own discussion board. No moderator made a big deal about the short discussion that followed the espionage request. A request was simply put forth (with a link, I might add) to continue the discussion on the Espionage board. That shouldn't be a big deal. However, the ensuing discussion of the request to move, is not appropriate on this board at all. Can we please now continue on with Feature Requests. Thank you.

Bry: The discussion on espionage didn't take long; it was the discussion whether it was properly placed here that seems to be endless...

Anyway, I do like to explain why I made my request and will do so at the espionage board.

playBunny: it should be moved as per the discussion board description.

There is a big difference between a "request" and a "discussion/debate".

On this occasion, the debate went on, and on, and so was interupted, and requested to be moved to the more specific board, where it would be best suited.

Fencer: In the time that I've been here there have been many long and at times detailed discussions. Only on a few occasions have you or a moderator brought one to a halt. That gives rise to the question, then, about when a discussion should be moved away from here. Or would we continue as we have been, and accept and follow redirections when given?

When I make teh size bigger, it gets OK but when I reduse teh size to its original small one, it is like that! Well, I guess I can manage with the bigger screen for now. thanks

reza: I don't know because I see nothing unusual on your games or settings. Try to change the board size on the Settings / Five in Line page.

Fencer: So what do you sugest teh problem is from? All my squares ar eyellow as they used to be, except those that have been used and I see no blue marks when my opponent moves. All my other games are good as usual!

reza: There were no changes applied to those games for a very loooooooong time.

Recently, I don't know what ha shappend to my five in line screens. The squares that have been marked by O's or X's lose their yellow color and turn white and besides, I canot se teh blue marks that show my opponent's last turn. If that's a recent change, i'd like to have an option so that i can turn it back to what it used to be like.

Thanks

Fencer: On many public boards for specific games people use it for a chat room to practice social skills entirely unrelated to the purpose of the board. While harmless in itself it is usually of zero interest to people who go to read about the game. It is difficult for the moderator to tell them to stop without looking like a bad guy. This board is probably not even the place to bring this up but it is connected in a way with what Rod and Bry are saying. Maybe in a distant way. LOL

Fencer: Great Minds.... LOL.

grenv:
This board is for things "you miss something on BrainKing.com and would you like to see it here"

Yes, it turned into (a very good) discussion, which would have been better served on the Espionage Discussion Board, rather than on this "feature Request" board.

We have "discussion" boards that are individual to each game/and or group of games. All I was saying was... use them.

grenv: I think you paid your subscription fees to play more games and use other extra features for paying members, didn't you? The Paid Membership page says nothing about discussion boards.
Moreover, Rod and Bry are right in one thing - this board is called Feature Requests, not Feature Discussions. Any detailed discussion among users should be redirected to the correct game board.

If you would like to discuss the moderating issue, please PM Bry or I. Any further discussion of this moderating issue will be deleted. Thank you.

grenv: I agree. It depends on Fencer's wishes, of course, but I think redirecting a feature discussion to another board is more of a loss than a gain. If the discussion turns into a chat then sure, send it away, or better still, PM the people involved and ask them to delete it (or, if pawns, ask for permission/inform them). But if the talk is about the feature then surely it belongs here.

Fencer: As a side query, I've always wondered why the Features board is a board of this style when it could be like the Bug Tracker with each item in it's own box.

I think a feature request needs to be debated a little in order for Fencer to assess support for the feature as well as understand the pros and cons before deciding whether to implement it. This is why a threaded discussion board would be better.

As it is responding to feature requests should be encouraged in order to further understanding. Why stifle creative discussion just because you're not interested?

rod03801:

As Bry stated, the initial request was certainly fine here. He simply requested that the ensuing discussion take place on the Espionage board. It is easy enough to make a post with a link to that board so that people that "only visit this board" can easilly go to that board and see the discussion. This is NOT the place to argue about where it should be. That can be done by PM. Thank you.

AbigailII: eh? why would a keen Espionage player not visit the board created for that game? That's the reason why the board is there.

As per the board description..... "Do you miss something on BrainKing.com and would you like to see it here? Post your request into this board!
If there is a more specific board for the request, (i.e. game rule changes etc) then it should be posted and discussed on that specific board"

Bry: Yeah, but what about the people not visiting the Espionage board? I'd say, people not visiting this board are not interesting in discussing possible new features, and we shouldn't take feature request discussion to board not dedicated to feature requests.

Or else, we'd be like people plastering their tournaments on boards not dedicated to announcing tournaments.

WhiteTower: originally, it was a request - and no doubt noted by Fencer, but the continuing discussion/chat about the pro's/cons etc is better placed on the correct board - so that users who perhaps only use that specific board to discuss Espionage (but perhaps dont visit here) can also have their opinion, read your posts/discussion.

In addition, note the description of the board at the top of the page.... ;)

Bry: Um, there was a request about no volcanoes - is that a feature request or an Espionage discussion?

WhiteTower: Here I am thinking the main thing separating espionage from chess is the fact the piece values are initially hidden. And now it turns out, the most significant thing is the presence of the vulcanos. Despite the river in Chinese chess.