It's very simple, if it doesn't have anything to do with a game that is being played and the moves/strategy of the game then delete it. You don't have to please anyone or worry about not pleasing anyone. This board should be about Gothic Chess here at this site. Let Ed deal with any further discussions on his patents or others deal with Ed at his site. Have conversations start off with "in game # "the strategic positioning or whatever, you catch my drift. You da man, keep it simple. The game could be mentioned in their Subject line. With people, you are dealing with a much more complex board than just 10X8 and the pieces. So, the simpler the rules are the better.

I forgot to mention one thing. The board did have rules posted in the past. I will look at those and if they are suitable, I will remind everyone of them. I don't mean to step in and take authority away from Thad and Walter. Any decisions will be made with their consent. Ideally we could arrive at a general concensus and balance the needs of the moderators and the contributors to this board, regardless of whether they are Brainrooks, Brainpawns, etc.

Hello everyone, I just logged on. I was away for about 6 hours and woke up to a nice surprise. 53 messages, most of which are useless personal attacks from one member to another. I will draft a proposed set of rules for posting and post them. One this is clear and that is that personal attackes from one member to another have to stop. Name calling (goose stepping ...), insults of all sorts, attacks on Walter, Ed and other members. We need a clear set of rules for hiding and banning members. I will work on this over the next few hours. On the one hand, I don't think it is good to remove free speech and become a discussion board Fascist moderator. At the same time, members have to show some respect for one another. I have to find a way to balance free speech, respect for others, and the interest in Gothic chess only. I will try my best to be impartial in all this. If anyone has any suggestions, please send them to me privately. Considering the way things are, I could do with some help.

That player was banned yesterday by Fencer due the suspicious circumstances of thier wins. So its old news LOL

anyone up for an easy win at gothic chess? send me an invite :o)

Could I suggest you remove the racist post by Thomas Barnes (3hrs ago) or edit it please

I respectfully disagree on that point, Thad. The loudest voices may want him removed, but many of the quiet readers would like for you to work together.
This may not work for you, but it could be worth a try... myself and NOT a floosie have an agreement that if one of us makes a decision like banning or hiding someone, the other person doesn't interfere. Co-moderators need to stand together, support and respect each other even if you don't necessarily agree with their every decision. Even if you only said "ok, I don't personally agree with that banning/hiding, but that was their decision and I stand by them". It would be much better than one of you banning someone, only for the other to come online and unban them. If you disagree so strongly, PM him. Calmly explain why you think its the wrong decision, then let him decide from there.

And you think it is good for prospective investers to read in reguards to ED??

This post was directed to Brumble's remark about being the best for Brainking.

redsales, you are right in thinking that there is a double standard going on of sorts. I am not moderating much of the language that is going on right now because I am too busy dealing with trying to get the situation with Walter resolved.

As soon as that is resolved, I will try to clean up some of the insulting posts that have eluded me recently. I can do a good job of moderating this board, if given the chance, but I cannot overcome all of the negativity/bickering/debate over Walter's position.

You are right, harley, but the overall problem here is more than just that. With the two of us as mods and the way this board goes with all the flareups, it is impossible to manage. The best solution in my opinion is for him to be removed. I am not saying this just because I think he was out of line with his patent posts, but for other reason too, the main one of which is that the voices of many other people are speaking and the overwhelming majority of them want him removed. Doing so would bring peace back to this board.

it is perfectly acceptable to express your opinion over the validity of a patent, even when in a conflict of interest. But you STILL think he should resign. Would that make the board any better? What about when (possibly fake) pawns call Caissus a goose stepping moron. Personal racist attack and not related to Goth at all. They don't even get a warning. Sounds like a double standard bordering on a vendetta to me.

Thad we all make mistakes. Its easy to get fired up about a subject once you start debating it, and you have to respect Walter for admitting the mistake and trying to make amends.
If the problem between you is just the patent thing, I'm sure you can easily work through that and have a better understanding afterwards.

Harley,

Thanks for the voice. Walter & I did have some disagreements at first. I think most of them were just misunderstandings. We exchanged some good PMs and I thought we were cool with each other, but then he got into it with Ed over the whole patent thing. As a poster, I didn't see it as a problem, but since he is a mod, he should have exercised better judgement. He went way over the line and even admits it himself in posts below. I think he should resign or be removed.

But trice, they are not my words - they are your own words...

Can dish it out, but can not take it. As soon as a lawsuit his way is mentioned, he runs. Typical Trice.

Bumble the forming of a lynch mob and making people take sides is the least effective way to make improvements. Harley sets rules for her DB and lets the chips fall where they may and people might get pissed for a bit (including me) but the bottom line is it works. Maybe tight rules firmly enforced would be the corrective that's needed.

OH NO - Trice lied about what I posted - EMOTIONAL DISTRESS. Going to be a Trice and call my lawyer and sue... Whaaaaaaaaa Whaaaaaaa Whaaaaaa

(sorry, that was my Trice impression)

Actually I don't remember saying his or anyone who does not play the game often opinion does not matter - just that fake pawn accounts should not.

And if you must know, the only reason I don't play Gothic Chess or offer that game in any of my "all game" tournament is that I don't know how much longer the game will be left on the site, and I don't want to be stuck in middle of games when it is removed, or have players stuck in my tournaments when the game is removed. As a side note, I am signed up for the Gothic Chess team tournament but is one of the less popular variants so probable will not start any time soon.

No, Ed, this board IS a concern of mine, harley, BBW and everyone else that wants the best for brainking. At the moment this board is a mess - a mess that is not good for prospective members to read. We are trying to resolve the situation.

Your own little kingdom :o)

You only want dedicated players?!

Discussion about patents, lawsuits, and moderators. :)

Thad, no disrespect to either of you, but since you ask for opinions... I think the only way for this board to 'come back under control' is for you and Walter to make some ground rules about how to run this board - preferably privately - and to stick to them. Right now people are taking advantage of you two not getting along. Instead of asking Walter to resign, work at creating a system that you both are happy with.

For what it's worth, I agree with BBW.

Ok, thanks for your thoughts BBW. If I can't get this situation resolved shortly, I suppose it will have to come to that. I will only switch to that as a last resort. Unfortunately, we are nearing that point.

Thad - you are not going to get too many more to post here - just look when Socks posted, he was jumped on right away.

My opinion to bring this board back under control - Change it so posts have to be approved for everyone. Then only approve post which deal with the subject of Gothic Chess.

Some pawn votes should count and some should not. It is easy to tell which are which. It just takes a few clicks.

1) If you are a true player here and haven't expressed an opinion, please do so.

2) If your account was just recently created, we will not count your vote, so please don't bother posting here. We have enough going on as is.


I would really like to see this board come back under control. I think the only way for that to happen is for Walter to resign as moderator (Fencer has basically told me that if Walter requests to be removed, it will be done). I have asked Walter to please step down.

I would like to continue to see everyone's opinions posted here for all to see.

Thad

Well looking at a couple of the pawn accounts, 2 were made withing the last week - one not even playing games.... so if you want to include fake pawn accounts in this "vote" of yours, then give me about an hour and I'll have 50 votes against this little vote of yours.

ThomasBarnes, I can vouch for smelly socks, he is not 'fake', he's just one of the many who read this board who normally choose not to post. Name calling won't help any situation.

Anyway even if you count the pawn accounts, 10 votes out of 11478 members isn't bad ;o)

As a Pawn, I admit we are not entitled to as many rights as paying members. In any case, maybe Fencer should just make moderating rules such that there is never any dispute as to who can ban who, who can become moderator etc. It's just too loose as it is now...

A good site should have a solid set of rules that everyone WILL follow or not be part of the site. I've written the main policy document for an Internet Relay Chat network in the past and, believe me, there are a LOT of things that need to be taken care of in that environment. In the end, IRC operators (like discussion board moderators here) have an effective tool to police an otherwise unmanageable mess...

Don't try to intimidate me.. Cas.. You are just man.. You ARE the weaker sex..

Nonsense..weak level,Scarlett.

I hear a hint of discrimination from you.. What.. you don't think pawns count??

What.. are you better than a pawn.. ?? Thomas has every right to his own opinion as well..

Geez!!

stinky socks looks fake you ask me. no interest in the game then he just shows up. fake. fake. fake. meanwhile the goose stepping moron from the country whose V1 rocket campaign bombed my grandparents back to the stone age jumps in.

I don't think he was defending Walter - he said the same thing I would have if he did not first - You can't really count the pawns votes - since it looks like they are just on the site to only vote (fake accounts). (not all pawns, but at least 2 there I seen.)

Plus Caissus has it right, all it takes is one vote to remove a Moderator - that is Fencer's. If it was votes of users, then Trice would have been removed from this site long ago.

you are insane.

It`s time to ban at last Thomas Barnes and to change the board to "Pawns must be approved"!

so stinky socks shows up to defend Walter out of the clear blue sky? something stinks in here. step down Walter.

I used to agree with you ted. I thought games within a match should be rated individually. But I have changed my thinking. Now, I can challenge someone that I am fairly confident I can beat to, say, a three wins match. If I stumble and make a boneheaded move, I might lose one game, but since only the entire match is rated, the loss does not appear in my ratings. Is this fair? Maybe not. But, since we all play under the same ratings rules, maybe it is. It should certainly encourage the top players who want to protect their ratings to play more, and that is a very good thing. I know of other gaming sites where that is a big problem. I'm sure that doesn't solve your problem, but maybe it softens the sting a little. ;-)

Exactly, Caissus.

Relevant is only one vote : Fencer`s!

At present in a match;no matter what the score of a match in progress,each player's ratings are unaffected. This I believe is highly unfair to both players as it makes a match of any lenghth rated as if it is only 1 game. If you win or lose a match by a score of 6-0 you recieve the same rating as if the score was 6-5. This is highly uninformative as to ones actual playing strength;since in the case of the 6-0 match the players were nowhere near as evenly matched as in the case of the 6-5 match. Rating each game would fix this flaw and encourage more people to play matches. At present I lead some of my matches by scores of 2-0 and trail some by 0-1,and in some cases I am even. Yet in no case does my profile reflect my actual won-loss record. I have actually won 12 lost 5 more games of gothic chess than my profile shows. Yet because I won one of those matches 4-0 and won another 2-1 and lost another 0-4 and am ahead in 3 matches 2-0;my rating doesn't show it.

You can discount the pawns for a start.

For removal of Walter we have

tedbarber
surdus
EdTrice
Chessmaster10
00
Thad
ChessCarpenter
CardinalFlight
fari
borz2
ScarletRose
ThomasBarnes

I count 10 votes am I missing anyone?

Anyone who advocates what Walter advocates in respect to anothers legal patent does not deserve to be a moderator of a board about that patent.

remove Walter. seems like he dont know how to mod a bord at all.

he's not. mr trice is a lovely man and a genius. he don't mind being second best at all.

ultimately, they'll only be meaningful after many, many games. Looking at ughaibu's stats, top in so many variants with hundreds of games in them, it's tough to dispute him as #1. I don't know if nellaf has left the site. If his rating bothers you, challenge him!

So how do you suggest making ratings meaningful only after a few handful of games Trice?

Which is exactly my point. Why not make them meaningful?

we don't lose rating points on timeout losses within the first 2 moves, I think. Ratings here are meaningless anyway!