Chess Player of the Month April 2011

His bark is worse than his smite.

Kacparov

The Grobe

List:

oinquarki     4

rigamagician

Writch     1

CBA     1

ivandh     4

Kacparov     9

TheGrobe     6

Windows-7_     2

mozerdozer

KiNg ChApO

Estragon     3

artfizz     4

Lucky

Gonnosuke

Conquistador     1

pathfinder416

Erik     4

yitzd

George1st

cheater_1

dalephilly     1

ChristianSoldier007

fezzik     6

pdela     5

____________________________________________

Yes, campaigning is fun, but it isn't fair. If only one person who supports a contestant campaigns, those who don't campaign will have less votes.

By not campaigning, we minimize the number of votes to those who have read the post not from campaigns, and it also means less work for me :))

You may think that it is a popularity contest if there is no campaigning because people will vote for who they know of, they can always look at the reasons why that person was nominated and it can influence their vote. If I was voting, the reasons why they were nominated can change my decision.

proKnight, you did bring up an interesting point though - people can campaign with malicious intent.  How to deal with this?

I suggest we should ignore it until it becomes a problem, like everybody else in politics.

 I trust people to not campaign, if it happens, intended or maliciously, then the same rules will apply.

You didn't count ivandh's vote for TheGrobe (#233) !?

I'd agree, with the additional caveat that if malicious intent can be demonstrated, a permanent ban is in order. 

Got a private message saying that there is some sort of heated discussion going on mentioning my name.

Guys, I don't care about message board elections, especially the weird "player of the month" which has nothing to do with playing chess and, as far as I can see from reading a few posts, is just a pastime for people who have nothing else to do instead of trying to show off their "popularity".

I don't want my name to be mentioned in such context. I didn't apply for participating in this "competition", neither did I persuade anyone to vote for me.

There are real contests like Chess Oscar, ChessPro's and Informant's game of the month, etc. This is what counts in the world of chess.

P.S. Having got 47,000+ followers on Twitter and nearly 8,000 on FaceBook, just imagine what result I could have scored if I cared. So please don't act foolishly and argue over rules of counting votes, or "fairness". Just keep it a "Chess.com message board's person of the month" contest and don't bother yourself with preventing non-existent campaigns and reviewing votes.

Nicely put Natalia.

Kacparov and Fezzik

lol for Natalia.  You guys heard it 

TheGrobe, that was my belief too - that if someone is purposefully campaigning, then a warning is issued.  But if it is a person who continues to campaign, then what do you do?  But I think the campaign issue is taken a bit far.  There is a better way to do this.  Have people suggest the names they like, and then have a public poll.  People click on the names they vote for.  This seems like a lot of work, you know?  And to worry about what is considered a campaign?  That seems like a lot of work too.  But, as the old saying goes, "You da boss!" 

Hey hey.. was wondering when you'd come to the party.. 

Clearly you were misinformed.  The discussion may be extended, but it hasn't been the least bit heated.  Your post is the first with a basically negative tone.

Well, maybe it did sound harsh, but I do find the concept of discussing some illusionary campaigns & plots, as well as potential descrimination of people who would vote for me on the basis of being a member of a certain group, undemocratic and evil.

Also, I do not deserve to be put on the list. Vladimir Potkin won the European Chess Championship in April. Polgar and Wojtasjek shared first. Kamsky won the US Championship. Kournosov scored a 2900+ performance at the Russian Club Cup.

Meanwhile, all I did in April was get a team bronze and individual silver at the Russian Club Cup, which is by no means comparable to the achievements mentioned above.

However, it seems that some people are serious about this and want to be named player of the month ahead of Potkin, Polgar and Kamsky. Why so modest? Why not call this contest Mr and Ms of the Universe right away?

P.S. If the contest is more about contributing to Chess.com than playing chess, then it makes sense to disregard staff/columnists as they have a higher exposure than others, and should be motivated by different means.

Fair enough.  As has been mentioned in several previous posts, the "contest" was about people having some fun together in the forums.  But you have set us straight.

A name change might help, but just about any name could be misinterpreted by driveby viewers who aren't familiar with the tone of banter of the past few months.

Let's just call it the monthly Pogonina award