Variant suggestion: Chinese Chess (Xiangqi)

Whoa, long comment. Are we talking about science?

Hey nnnnn034...well, sort of...science of chess history and evolution...I was actually just commenting on the previous post about that surgeon, that was posted with the intention to demoralize scientific research and its experts...tried to correlate with the science behind Chess history and evolution, but I dont want indeed to deviate too much from the original topic. Cheers,

ok

So, what "truth", then, does an "expert's opinion" hold, when it may be "subjected to scrutiny?" You said it. You admit official opinion change all the time with "new information".

Your original assertion is that we should always it is ideal to consult an expert rather than making our own opinion as something official for ourselves. You said this.

You don't even realize it when you fail to present a consistent argument.

Excuse me? 

I am telling you directly to not inappropriately refer to me as a man when I'm not. 

Continue on this path, and it will be a problem.

----------------

Not to mention that your attitude on "official opinion as truth" has been nothing but disrespectful. You were ultimately saying that the truth people make aren't "truths" unless it was consulted with an "expert".  You don't acknowledge that 'regulars' have a decent point unless it is in line with those who are upheld as authority figures on the matter. 

Your own words: you receive what you give.

Do you think people who make potentially valid points are going to favor you?

There you have it. So, what "truth", then, does an "expert's opinion" hold, when it is, as you said, sometimes "subjected to scrutiny?" 

BattleChessGN18...you are really not trying to understand what I am trying to say. This is independently on your personal point of view. You have yours and that is completely fine. I am not trying to convert you or anything or we will start discussing in circles here.

Just as brief recall: there were lots of comments and discussions, for example, about the Chess and Chess variants terminology here. Many of those comments with a very assertive sentences, even when it was clearly some confusion and not accurate information. Such as Xiangqi is not Chess or this is a completely another type of game and so on…just to pick up some examples.

Based on that, my very first post was sort of an alert for people not to forget to take some time to try also to look for information on a subject as well, instead of just throwing own assertive opinions…so common nowadays in social media…everybody has a PhD at everything these days. Where to look at that info? Well…from people that spent a whole life dedicated to that? Collecting info, analyzing the data available and so on…where else you are going to for it?

It not about truth…it is about what is the best collective knowledge that we have about something with the current data available. What you believe, want to believe, your opinion, those are another matter…it is your truth.

Mistakes, limitations are part of every aspect in life and human knowledge. So what? You have a problem in your skin or want to know something about skin health or skin cancer, you better look for an expert…not me, not a regular as you put it. Is this so odd? Well, its not about skin cancer…it is about Chess…so? History and evolution of Chess is a very rich field with different fields collecting different info. If you like history in general you will certainly find this one as well very interesting.

So, when one is trying to clarify this whole thing about the terminology of Chess and Chess variants, for example…lets go for the ones who spent 20 years or more studying that…they probably have something interesting and elucidative to say.

You said it. You admit that official opinion of sorts change all the time, when "new information" arises.

You got it wrong…in science, consensus knowledge that leads to advancements does not change everytime and all the time…it does change, when and if, enough new evidences arises, in other words, when necessary by the evidences. This is the beauty of it. You don’t have to believe or relay on things you think are truth, opinions. Again, it is not perfect, but it is one the best ways to seek for knowledge…peers scrutiny is a key part of the process...another beauty of it.

Your original assertion is that we should always consult an expert rather than making our own official opinion as some official standard for ourselves. You said this.

Yes, of course. This is a good and reasonable caution, specially if the subject is dense and complex. What you believe and think is up to you only. That’s ok…unless you start spreading wrong and misleading information. So to minimize this, I don’t see as a bad thing to consult the experts.

You don't even realize it when you fail to present a consistent argument.

Really don’t see your point here….

Excuse me? I am telling you directly to not inappropriately refer to me as a man when I'm not. Continue on this path, and it will be a problem.

Where on my very first post I was disrespectful? Was that because of the following sentence you did feel insulted? “It is usually a good idea to go for the experts before accepting so many "own" opinions as the truth.” Was that the cause of your anger? Assuming then things that I didn’t say or mean such as be “western imperialistic egocentrism” or called me Bubba?

Let me tell you something. Every time you go to that path on a discussion, any discussion, things will probably go downwards for then on. That was what happened at my following response. I am not happy with that, but who the hell are you to call me Bubba in the first place? You were not even understanding what was trying to explain.

I don’t see my very first post as disrespectful…if it was…well…as English is not my native language and you have the American flag on your name, you probably are more expert than me in this regard…so I will still try to see where I did something wrong and take note.

Not to mention that your attitude on "official opinion as truth" has been nothing but disrespectful. You were ultimately saying that the truth people make aren't "truths" unless it was consulted with an "expert".  You don't acknowledge that 'regulars' have a decent point unless it is in line with those who are upheld as authority figures on the matter. Your own words: you receive what you give. Do you think people who make potentially valid points are going to favor you?

This discussion is going into circles. Its time to end this. Just as I said, take the info and your opinion as you wish. I disagree entirely, but I will respect that. I was not going to respond more to you, but I did, because even in face of all the situation, I can’t avoid to show people respect after all. Take as well my sincere apologizes to call you Sir. That was just an expression used in the heat of the discussion after you called me Bubba. See how ridiculous discussions go downwards when you deviate from debating ideas and info? I don’t need people favoring me, thanks. If people have potentially valid points, perfect, show them, this interest me, preferably with some references if comes from people that are not experts in the field. Even experts bring some data and references…

I don’t even know what Bubba is…but my advice…try to avoid telling strangers names…You receive what you give. Be respectful and people will respect you. Good people at least, I hope.

This is because you fail to make a legitimate consistent argument. It's a good idea to consult experts, according to you, only to imply on the contrary that experts aren't infallible.

^^(Couldn't one say infallible all the same for every other logically sane, intelligent human on Earth, crowned expert or not?)

So, you don't know what "Bubba" means. You don't even know if that's actual name-calling. Yet, you feel that this justifies your right to refer to me as sir, when I'm a ma'am?

"Bubba" is, in this given context, a slang for "buddy"/"pal". (Traditionally, it meant "bro". In this day and age, it can acceptably be used as gender neutral in many instances.) People uncommonly use this to refer to each other in casual conversations.

When you're asked to respect someone's gender and you don't, that is a complete disregard for social decency. It is harassment.

You have been asked to stop referring to me as sir, and not only did you not stop, you continued to defend your position to do so; under the false recourse that my giving respect would make me earn it in return.

I have warned you. Now, I will be informing moderators.

Just go ahead. I don't care anymore. Talking to you is talking to a wall. Bye.

Very good. Done.

well that settles that

eek... WIGO??

@qfcbv

I'm not a guy. I'm a woman.

That aside, what are you talking about even? lol

I think OP of this thread deleted his/her post because he/she may have felt embarrassed when 1e4c6_O-1 and I advised that Xiangqi isn't a variant. 

It's an honest mistake, really. It wouldn't be the first time someone innocently mis-referred to Xiangqi as a variant. Different non-FIDE standard chess games are simply foreign and unknown to those who have long known FIDE as "regular chess". Of course these people are going to automatically regard these other games as some kind of variation to the chess they've always known. 

ok...?

The rationale behind this topic of Chess terminology is based, among other things, on the existence of a long local history and literature of a particular form of chess. That's is when Regional Chess terminology comes in as a more precise terminology rather than Chess variants. According to historians of the history of chess.

So FIDE Chess is indeed a regional Chess, such as Xiangqi, Janggi, Makruk, Shogi and so on. All of them, according to the data so far collected, can be track back to a common form of an ancestral game of chess played in India. Probably Chaturanga. When that ancestral form reached the Persian Empire, Shatranj was born and it was the main form of Chess in the world for centuries. From there it reached several other corners of the globe giving birth to all the other regional variants such as the Chess of the Mad Queen (our FIDE chess), Xiangqi, Janggi, Shogi and so on...all of them with its own variants as well...

Eventually, the Chess of the Mad Queen boost its popularity in Western Europe and this particular form of Chess spread out to the entire planet. In the Western Hemisphere it turned out to be the main form of it, but it is widely played everywhere as well. Because of this, an international federation of Chess was created with this form of chess that has spreaded out geograhically as no other form of chess had before...perhaps only similar to Shatranj back in that time in the known world...that's why people, and especially in the Western World, this FIDE Chess is seeing as the standard Chess, or simply Chess...and people considered all of the other forms as Chess variants.  That's because the History of Chess is not well known by the general public. Unfortunately. International Chess is another name given to that form of chess, which is not wrong actually...it is indeed, today, international.

Interesting to consider is that FIDE Chess is so well spread that we have many examples of it overshadowing long time played local forms. Some countries interestingly are trying to revive nowadays some forms of their local regional chess as part of its national identity...I can name a few here: Sittuyin (Burmanese Chess), Seterej (Ethiopian Chess), Hiashatar (Mongolian Chess) and Tavreli (Russian Chess)...if those efforts will succeed or not only time will tell…

Again, those 2 books below are a fantastic source to anyone interest into know more about the History and Evolution of Chess.

"A History of Chess, written by H. J. R. Murray"

"A World of Chess: Its Development and Variations through Centuries and Civilizations, by Jean-Louis Cazaux and Rick Knowlton"

Ok, well, I'm sorry. The little points of criticism, however casual, are in the details, as far as how I saw it.

What you're probably annoyed at, if I'm reading in between the lines right, is how I went off on an irrelevant tangent (which I admitted to doing) from your intended topic on why you don't particularly favor Xiangqi. 

However, if you were a Black individual, and a White forumer posted a topic about Chess, using certain terminology that may unintentionally yet nevertheless offensively reference race, I'm sure you would have wanted to go off on an irrelevant tangent to address it, too.

As a Chinese woman, I do feel that Xiangqi gets misrepresent quite a bit; sometimes unfairly caricatured. That is why I'm putting a firm foot down on it. 

BattleChessGN18, I can’t avoid getting into this again, sorry, I will try to be back on topic as well.

I do understand what you say and it makes totally sense. Thats whay I did apolizige to have insisted in the Sir, although at the first place it was just a wrong expression of exclamation put it from my side at the heat of the discussion...it was nothig to do with any form of gender offensive racism. 

“However, if you were a Black individual, and a White forumer posted a topic about Chess, using certain terminology that may unintentionally yet nevertheless offensively reference race, I'm sure you would have wanted to go off on an irrelevant tangent to address it, too."

Beautifully posted, I do agree with you, but regarding respect, again, start it to put in practice by yourself as well even at the level of the details on a daily basis.

This forum as any other form of social media forum is a public place with lots of strangers from around the globe. Dont feel confortable because no one can see you or you are in the safe spot of your place. This is the big mistake people do nowadays in our social media world. You should follow the good etiquette as if you were in a public place in discussion with strangers in person, face to face. You never start informal, do you? Do you call Bubba someone you met by the first time when exchanging information? I dont, never! You dont know who is at the other side of the internet. Once I know and stablish a friendship, thats another story. This is more critical in a multilanguage place...this should be a common sense.

I am not your Bubba, I am not your Pal and you have no right to reach me by any informal mean possible. This is respect. Don’t care what Bubba means and I don’t have nor I need to know slang language at a non-native idiom for me. This is as offensively unrespectful as any other form of names or terminologies referring race or any other thing.  Do you have to know slang language in portuguese to speak to me? No, you don't and I will never use it in forums like this, only If I am chatting with my friends.

I did ask you where I was unrespectful in my VERY FIRST post and you have never answered me back. Not at the following responses once the dialogue went downwards because you called me Bubba and a "western imperialistic egocentric".

So yes, I did something wrong, really sorry about that, it was silly on my part, but put yourself in your place as well and don’t come to me with all your decency lessons unless you do it for yourself to others in the first place.

If you don’t want my apologies and have requested something to the moderators, that’s fine for me. I assume fully any form of consequences to my own actions. In my opinion, I doubt chess.com will ban me, I am actually have been in contact with them to get an upgraded membership, but If they do, that’s ok as well. I have plenty of other chess sites and softwares to play my beloved game.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ok, but enough of this and back on topic. I agree with you about Xiangqi getting misinterpret. That’s true. I feel the same. I still think that letting people to know more about chess history can help solve this as well and there is no better way to do that as to go for some experts information in this field.

Interesting as well that you have mentioned you are a chinese woman. I got recently a pdf book called "Xiangqi for absolute beginners". Fantastic book for novices and it is written in English. This will be my next endeavor.

I find Chinese culture fascinating. I have reviewed so far the pieces movements (resembles a lot FIDE chess in general, of course), and I am trying right now, through mnemonic exercises, to correctly identify the Chinese ideograms in the pieces. I don’t want to use international figures or pieces to play Xiangqi...I want to play it as it is in China. I think is more immersive and fun. It is actually not so hard...I can readily identify some of them so far, such as the horse.

You might probably know already, but this is a link for the book I have mentioned and with some other with puzzles.

http://xiangqielephantgame.blogspot.com/p/download-free-ebook.html

And the following YouTube channel I have recently discovered is right now one of my favourites: Xiangqi for Chess Players ((1) How to play Chinese Chess - Xiangqi in English - Lesson - YouTube) it starts with the very basics and move forward.

Cheers,

YES @BattleChessGN18 YOU ARE THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!

wow that's very positive

ok

if you want2 play a lot of chess variants go 2 greenchess.net

Both sites suggested are very nice indeed! Pychess.org is very well done website and with lots of new features coming...there is also a little software called ChessV (ChessV Universal Chess Program). Lots of variants as well.  

Finally, There is also a new concept of chess with lots of new pieces (Chess Evolved Online (CEO) - Chess Evolved Online (CEO). Kind of crazy, but really fun. Also free.