kleelof wrote:
As you can see from my little star, I have a Gold memebership on Chess.com.
I was thinking about this today and thought, "Isn't gold usually the best? Why is it the lowest membership?"
Well, Google found the answer. Diamonds and Platinum clearly are more valuable than gold.
http://www.businessinsider.com/9-substances-more-valuable-than-gold-2011-7?op=1
However, based on this article, I think there were some better names that could have been used.
Plutonium is, to me, a very good canidate to replace diamond. Diamonds are nice, but Plutonium makes me think of destructive, explosive power. Which, of course, is something most chess players would like to have at the chessboard.
But diamonds are forever!
As you can see from my little star, I have a Gold memebership on Chess.com.
I was thinking about this today and thought, "Isn't gold usually the best? Why is it the lowest membership?"
Well, Google found the answer. Diamonds and Platinum clearly are more valuable than gold.
http://www.businessinsider.com/9-substances-more-valuable-than-gold-2011-7?op=1
However, based on this article, I think there were some better names that could have been used.
Plutonium is, to me, a very good canidate to replace diamond. Diamonds are nice, but Plutonium makes me think of destructive, explosive power. Which, of course, is something most chess players would like to have at the chessboard.