is if new accounts had to wait a period of 7 days to post to the DB's. They should spend the first few days just getting familiar with the place anyway and I guess that most new accounts don't post right away anyway.

Personally I think the chess icons for membership level are a great idea. Even IYT has the red symbol vrs no symbol to distinguish paid members from non paid. Membership does have its perks. :) No matter the symbol used, people would know the difference. Most, I'm guessing, don't think much about it.

This site is well worth supporting. It's a player's site. If the members want it, and Fencer can impliment it, it's a done deal.

I don't mean to presume anyone's financial situation. But, for just ten bucks you can have 6-months and give membership a try. 18 bucks a year gives you a Knight level for an entire year. Save up, beg, borrow, (don't steal) give hints for birthday presents and of course Santa could leave you something in the form of a BK membership this year too (if you're good).

Now maybe Fencer could add a Brain Bishop account and charge $14 for six months (13 is an unlucky number) and $22 for a year. These numbers are halfway in between the Knight and Rook fees. There could be a limit of 100 started games and maybe 3-5 tournaments. This type of membership might be good but it may have drawbacks. I don't use the full benefits of a Rook membership but the Knight membership is not enough. The Bishop membership would meet my needs (except that I am currently in 14 tournaments...so...). The drawback is that if Rooks downgrade to the Bishop membership....well, you get the idea. I'll bet Fencer thought of this already?

Just trying to stay on forum theme. :)

[WhiteBKR "1732"]
[BlackBKR "1603"]

It will list the BKR at the time of the game. Saves looking it up if you're checking out other people's games :)

Here is the Internet Chess Club. You have everything of importance IMO but it might be nice to add ratings. Other than that looks great.

[Event "ICC 60 15"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2003.05.24"]
[Round "-"]
[White "ArtfulDodger"]
[Black "Vandebedian"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ICCResult "Game drawn by mutual agreement"]
[WhiteElo "1732"]
[BlackElo "1603"]
[Opening "Queen's bishop game"]
[ECO "D02"]
[NIC "QP.08"]
[Time "12:05:31"]
[TimeControl "3600+15"]

Yes it's a great addition to BK. Does anyone know how to combine a group of pgn files?

That would work too BBW although it would require a bit more maintenance. My idea, which is similar to the one used on yahoo groups, would automatically fend off those like "slam" (and any others) that sought to disrupt a forum though undeserved "slams."

The only drawback is that the moderator would have to approve messages of posters until they are put on regular status. But, once approved, they would be free to post unrestricted. A powerful tool for the moderators and a way to keep the forums clean and foil attempts of some to disrupt.

If such a system would be easy for Fencer to setup, he could also use your idea as well so that several moderators share the work. I don't think the amount of posts needing approval would be a problem.

Fencer, this is not a huge deal but IMO would help aleviate some of the problems in the general chat area.

This idea would apoly to all open forums (open to non-members).

Could something be set up whereby all new non-members (I'd exclude members as they are not the problem here) are automatically put on "moderated" status for posting privledges. Moderated status means that a person is free to write a post but it won't actually get posted unless it gets the approval of the moderator. Once a person "proves" him or herself, they are placed on normal status. If they become a problem for the moderator, they could also be placed on moderated status. (even 'no posting" privledges if necessary)

What will this accomplish? We will foever avoid such nonsense as we are currently subjected to by "sLaM" and those like him.

I know you are busy with other things and I may be one of but a few who think this a good idea. I run a Yahoo discussion list (only 500 total members) and they have a similar feature there. It's helped me avoid many drive-by "slams" and helped keep the peace. Plus, it's not that time consuming.

I have no idea how that would affect the time of the moderators here. Just a thought.

Backgammon is a game of both skill and luck. It's far more skill than people realize. And just like the varying skill levels in any game, Backgammon has its own varying skill levels. Can a beginner beat an experienced player? Yes. Is this totally dependent on the roll of the dice? No. Poorly placed pieces regardless of the roll of the dice can almost guarantee you a loss. But more importantly, an experienced player will win the majority of the games against less skilled opponents (statistically speaking).

I don't know if the debate here is the luck of the dice and how that places an unfavorable advantage to the lower rated players as far as the ratings setup here goes, or if the debate is simply over the issue of luck vs. skill.

Here are some sites to check out.

Salar's site
Backgammon
Newsgroup Archive
Skill vrs Luck
Backgammon
balances luck with skill
A Measure of Luck
Various articles

My own opinion is that two players of equal strength playing at their best will be at the mercy of the dice roll at least at some level. However, since there have been world champions who consistently win even against highly skilled players, luck must be statistically ruled out.

"I think the thing about backgammon is that the luck of the dice means that a weak player can beat a stronger player quite often."

Backgammon is not a game based on luck. It's a game based on both luck and skill. Pick up any backgammon game book and it's easy to see why there are consistent top rated players in the world and 2- and 3-time world champions. They understand the game on a deeper level.

As for my skill.....I obviously don't know much about the game and at my level, luck has more to do with it perhaps. But just like chess, there is an element of skill and knowledge and once one masters even the basics, your game will improve. If a backgammon players can understand the the elements of probability and odds, the "luck" factor is diminished.

I have some questions regarding fellowship tournaments. Not sure if this is the right forum but since it's probably a feature topic, I hope this is fine.
I am a chess team captain. Players range in playing strength from beginners to seasoned vets. In order to build a strong team and be competitive, one probably wants to place strong players on ones team. Here are some questions I have:
*How will the fellowship tournaments work? Will all team members of one team play all members of another or will play be done via board assignments?
*Is there going to be a limit to the number of players allowed per team?
*I am told that Captains can boot off players. I've not figured out how to do this. :)
*Is it possible (and even a good idea) to have teams assigned according to rating? What I'm thinking is that there could be divisions such as U1500 division, U2000 and Open (for all but for 2000 and above. Other ideas are just a U1600 and then an Open section. The idea here is to give players of lower ratings a chance to play against people of like rating.
*I'd suggest that unrated players need a rating before they are allowed to play fellowship games.
*Just some thoughts and questions I have for now. I'd appreciate feedback and would like to get some dialogue going (maybe this has been discussed already and I've missed it??) regarding tournaments and what can be expected. No hurries. Just putting the feelers out. :)

Mine seems to work fine. I know it's a silly question but are you sure you are clicking on the right button after you choose which game to go to?