No problem, babs. I wouldn't intentionally twist your words. I respect them. Besides, I think I should leave word twisting to chessplayer11 and his sophistic techniques of argumentation. That seems to be his territory upon which I would not want to encroach. I was merely trying to improve your suggested twelfth choice by sharpening the wording to focus it more on the real nub of the matter. In any case, it seems that it may be I who misunderstood you. I may have read more into your comment than you meant it to have. Sorry if I did.

My comment  Gerry was simply to imply that no matter if the majority voting favour 'Correspondence Chess', that  I think Erik will go for another name, not the 'winning/won' name. My money's on 'Daily Chess'. 

But I could be wrong, it's happened before.. in a previous lifetime. 

Right. Your emphasis was on prediction, while mine was on whose preferences should be accommodated more--Erik's or his customers. Got it! By the way, I guess that other matter was many lifetimes ago. LOL.

 Yes, correct! On every count. hehe.

[COMMENT DELETED]

Correspondence Chess seems to be most appropriate. 

How about "two day chess" "three day chess" etc? Self explanatory?

You can't call it daily chess cos that'll make people think you play it each and/or every day so they won't guess it could be over more than one day. I don't believe in dumbing down language but you have, at the same time, to be realistic - I know what correspondence chess means, cos I've been on the planet for quite a while, but I also know many people, new people really (the ones we want to encourage?), that wouldn't have any more idea on that than how to add up in pounds, shillings & pence (which incidentally I would re-introduce in the U.K. to counter the dumbing down of mathematical skills - another story). Anyway, I've only just spotted these forums and in this one I can see there are 52 pages of it and that somewhere along the line a shortlist of twelve names has been identified. Without spending hours on it, would someone be kind enough to give an update on where things are at? p.s. what a lovely site this is where you can play chess, at the drop of a hat, with all sorts of people from all around the world - absolutely brilliant.

Agreed Zarafact, I said the same thing on page something or other, that  the first association I got as well when I saw the term 'Daily Chess' was that it implied one had to log on daily to move. 

I think we should call it Chess Kababs.

Then those "new people...that wouldn't have any...idea" should be encouraged to use reference sources which are so readily available to them to learn terms with which they are not familiar instead of dumbing down the English language for them. That's what seems "realistic" to me. We have had way too much dumbing down in general anyway. It only begets more dumbness. Enough is enough. After all, how much should those who are unwilling or too lazy to learn be pampered, especially in such simple matters? No, I want the English language kept up to standard. Let the ignorant put out a little effort and learn how to find out for themselves about what they don't know.

I like where you're coming from Sooner, of course we should encourage new people to understand where they have come from. However we have to consider where the starting point for such a process might most usefully be. I am only suggesting that alienating them from the outset with a bunch of outdated gobbledegook that only we understand might not be the best place to begin. I had no problem saying gaga googoo to my daughter or grandson when first born and now, having engaged them, we enjoy all sorts of rewarding interaction on a much more advanced level. In this case we are not anyway looking at language or mathematics, art or science, but at a game which ultimately encapsulates all of human experience - chess. I say encourage this first by any means, on a chess website, after that (?) well, there are opportunities to present one's arguements through human discourse. For example . . .

Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,

Quite enough of that, methinks . . .

   Let's hearten through inclusion people who may wish to play chess by lettin them know wots wot . . . : )

Sooner  is right.  Let's be realistic.  As he stated, _( I paraphrase), "...let those (ignorant) "new people" that would't have any idea...learn for themselves about what they don't know."  Well said, Sooner.  Let the ignorant teach themselves.  Brilliant.  

 Here is my next suggestion for a name for on-line chess:  Orchestrial Manovers in the Dark.

Hamlet was my favourite Shakespearean play Zarafact.. I know that monologue by heart..  

...very touching, chess_kebabs...perhaps you should get a room and act out the last soliquiy.

Soliloquy

Soliloquy

Oh,

Soliloquy

Wherefore art thou?

In poetry?

In life?

In dramatic dance into the night?

Let ChazR speak the truth

And end this shame?

Chess_Kebabs in time

No blame Sooner, in space

Just a simple about face

To square the circle

In golden lace

And love of peace

Check Mate is simple(y)

The Mark of the Beast

On your heart.

Tell people

Tell them

Tell them

TELL THEM

Don't ask

Nice typing, Zarafact; but the content is seriously off point.

An especially mean, impoverished, and shabby sarcasm, ChazR, completely unworthy of even the slightest notice of decent people.

Cheap and lame attempt at humour too.

Agreed emphatically.