Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Debate: What to call "Online Chess"...

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #841


    Correspondingly ...how about "Chess Restante" similar to well known correspondence usage of Post Restante?

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #842


    fortnight chess

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #843


    Paul Revere Chess

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #844


    Rebound Chess

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #845


    Your typical online chess player:

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #846


    This thread has revealed the amazing number of comedians there are in chess.com's membership. Who could have guessed it? It might not be quite so pathetic, though, if at least a few of them had any wit or cleverness at all about them. By the way, "online chess" and "turn-based chess" are truly lame designations for what is merely a computerized version of correspondence chess. Pardon me for stating the painfully obvious, but all "online chess" games played on this site are online chess; and, in all of those "turn-based games," the players always take turns making their moves. Thus, all the tortured efforts herein to imagine "creative" names simply collapse logic and common sense in upon themselves. The absurdly strenuous efforts in this thread put one in mind of the old saying: "The mountains go into labor, and are delivered of a mouse." It really takes no effort of any intellectual proportion to make the conceptual leap from postal chess to its computerized, slightly modified counterpart, all the while using the same term that would be familiar to anyone who is any kind of chess player at all, i.e., correspondence chess. Aren't there any other more useful, potentially productive things to which we can turn our attention and efforts as we try to cope with this nightmarish monstrosity which chess.com and its propellor heads suddenly foisted upon their customers? And no apologies to the propellor heads, either. In fact, I suggest they use their next vacation to visit the real world just to see it. If there is anything they are not overly burdened with, it's a sense of reality.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #847


    I agree Sooner. Why call it something it's not.

    It's Correspondence Chess. None of the other given names truly represents it well. Everyone who wants to play it will play it, regardless of what you  call it, so  might as well stick to what it actually is. And you can add a small grey line under the title  to help the casual players who don't understand the term, if Erik is still concerned about players not understanding the term. Not like 'Daily Chess' explains what it is any  better or any other name dropped here.  I personally don't think changing the name is going to be a marketing advantage for the above reasons given, because no new names dropped here any better explained what the games are.

    To  me changing the name to something like 'daily chess' or 'anytime chess' or any of the other names given, most being corny/silly names, puts the game of chess on par with the game of tiddly winks. Chess isn't that basic and we don't need to treat the players as if they are basic. We just need to help the casual players understand the term maybe.  Sorry if I offended any tiddly winks players here.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #848


    what about chess4cheats?

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #849


    what about chess4cheatsbecausethereisnocentaurpoolhere ?

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #850


    The one thing that distinguishes correspondence chess from other forms of chess right now is the RAMPANT amount of cheating involved IMHO :) so it only seems appropriate

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #851


    I wasn't being negative MonteChristosPawn, just stating the fact. :)

    For many anyway, the ones who wouldn't cheat if there was a Centaur pool here. I concede 'some' will still use engines in the main pool and cheat even if there was a Centaur pool here and they should be banned if caught, but many will be happy to play in their own designated respected non-interfering pool, if given that opportunity. It will get them out of the main pool and everyone will be as happy as Larry.. except the die hard engine haters who would rather see them burn in hell than be allowed to play here, even if they are playing in a pool that has nothing to do with them. Personally I would never use one, never care to use one, but I know many do love them. It's obvious because we all know many use them here. :) So give them a place to play and the majority of engine users should no longer be damaging the ratings of the non engine users nor the pleasure of the game for them. :)

    It's a win/win for everyone. 

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #852


    Stampnl wrote:

    The one thing that distinguishes correspondence chess from other forms of chess right now is the RAMPANT amount of cheating involved IMHO :) so it only seems appropriate

    It is 'RAMPANT" Stampni, I agree with you. Time a solution was found.

    Post #898 is the solution.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #853


    Man, at least in the cheating forum it was half-ways relevant (but still ridiculous).

    Here it's just agenda pushing in a completely unrelated thread.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #854


    Am just responding to those who keep saying chess4cheats as the new name and other similar type cheating names.. I wasn't the one to bring up references to cheating in the name suggestions.  ;)

    Why didn't you target those people Grobe?  No one is allowed to respond to such suggestions? 

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #855


    "Now or Later" Chess. Or maybe even "Now and Later" Chess

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #856


    Only names that really suit ARE long-names..


  • 4 years ago · Quote · #857


    dilatory chess

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #858


    Confidence in nonsense is a requirement for the creative process... Correspondence Chess is the only name that makes any sense, so let us call it a day on this one.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #859


    Not quite so fast.

    "Correspondence" is so 19th century. The word is mostly archaic. No one even writes letters anymore. That was a cornerstone of "correspondence". And, all the postal service delivers these days is "junk mail"...no "correspondence".

    We do get email. Lots of it. So, more suitable for the times: echess.

  • 4 years ago · Quote · #860


    Correspondence accurately conveys chess that takes time to complete.

    echess does not & will cause confusion & misconstrued selections. So bad-inferior choice.

Back to Top

Post your reply: