Friday this week I've been here 5 years. Yes, I've seen a lot on this site during that time.
Forum's Quality
Sort:
First of all, I would like to thank Metastable for his creative "descriptive notation" and bobyyyy for sharing it with us.
As for the forum quality, the problem is that chess.com invites a diverse group of people to interact within a common realm, in this case, chess. Forums serve the purpose of sharing members' opinions to the cyberpublic and the staff.
Using a Shakespearean-related analogy, there are two different types of members on chess.com (if you don't count the "cyberimperialists"): those who devote their lives to the game and use chess.com as their training ground to pursue a high rating (aristocrats), and those who play online just for fun and to pass the time and make friends (groundlings).
For the groundlings, it is in their nature to interact with the chess.com public by posting fun forum topics that are often irrevelant to the game (if they are not asking other members for ways to improve via forums or stuff like that). They are also often the most prone to become "trolls" and "spammers", even though they might not be aware.
To the day....sounds like your scratching a five bar gate on the wall.
VULPES_VULPES wrote:
First of all, I would like to thank Metastable for his creative "descriptive notation" and bobyyyy for sharing it with us.
As for the forum quality, the problem is that chess.com invites a diverse group of people to interact within a common realm, in this case, chess. Forums serve the purpose of sharing members' opinions to the cyberpublic and the staff.
Using a Shakespearean-related analogy, there are two different types of members on chess.com (if you don't count the "cyberimperialists"): those who devote their lives to the game and use chess.com as their training ground to pursue a high rating (aristocrats), and those who play online just for fun and to pass the time and make friends (groundlings).
For the groundlings, it is in their nature to interact with the chess.com public by posting fun forum topics that are often irrevelant to the game (if they are not asking other members for ways to improve via forums or stuff like that). They are also often the most prone to become "trolls" and "spammers", even though they might not be aware.
I don't know if I like being refered to as a "groundling". When I hear groundling, I think of those people who tend the golf courses and get pelted by golf balls.
stevie65 wrote:
To the day....sounds like your scratching a five bar gate on the wall.
What?
Conquistador wrote:
VULPES_VULPES wrote:
First of all, I would like to thank Metastable for his creative "descriptive notation" and bobyyyy for sharing it with us.
For the groundlings, it is in their nature to interact with the chess.com public by posting fun forum topics that are often irrevelant to the game (if they are not asking other members for ways to improve via forums or stuff like that). They are also often the most prone to become "trolls" and "spammers", even though they might not be aware.
I don't know if I like being refered to as a "groundling". When I hear groundling, I think of those people who tend the golf courses and get pelted by golf balls.
Then you clearly have a different impression and definition of the word.
VULPES_VULPES wrote:
stevie65 wrote:
To the day....sounds like your scratching a five bar gate on the wall.
What?
I was talking to someone!
I didn't hear you say i myself in your analysis of the forum gangs?
stevie65 wrote:
VULPES_VULPES wrote:
stevie65 wrote:
To the day....sounds like your scratching a five bar gate on the wall.
What?
I was talking to someone!
I didn't hear you say i myself in your analysis of the forum gangs?
1. You should also tell us who you are talking to for the sake of not being misunderstood.
2. Second line of your comment: What?!
VULPES_VULPES wrote:
stevie65 wrote:
To the day....sounds like your scratching a five bar gate on the wall.
What?
Stereotyping & categorising the varied & diverse contributions of chess.com membership is impossible.
The forums function similarly to a ''Letters-Page'' in a magazine hence opinions are likely to vary on any given topic. Editing may be necessary when these opinions become heated !
Above all people should never take themselves too seriously !!
Those whom start forum-topics should be aware that in doing so a multitude of responses may result & often these may be critical or questioning in nature ?
Firstly i do not need to tell anybody anything!
Which are you;Aristocrats or a groundling or maybe a cyberimperialist?
I am an elitist.
Freeloaders are really missing out on the free chess.com merchandise.
Aug 6, 2012
0
#53
You pay chess.com extra to get access to well-crafted videos, instructional material and advice.
The forums are free, and worth every penny!
DrSpudnik wrote:
You pay chess.com extra to get access to well-crafted videos, instructional material and advice.
The forums are free, and worth every penny!
Are you saying that forums are worthless, then?
BorgQueen wrote:
Some topics are pathetic, some are repeats, some are just boring, but I don't think the answer is spamming photos in lame topics or ridiculing those who don't know better.
heretic!
ChessisGood wrote:
Well, a good forum has three principle qualities:
Formatting + Grammar - While this may not be important to some, a good-looking and grammatically correct forum is much more appealing than one filled with slang, trolls, and random pictures.Oh brother (and btw how do you spell "principal" again?)... 
Aug 6, 2012
0
#58
" how do you spell "principal" again?"
Why would you want to spell it again?
bobyyyy wrote:
Fortunately there are people who are the exact opposite, for example the brilliant Metastable wrote:
Descriptive notation:
"But soft, what light through yonder file breaks
It is on the back rank, and it is a queen
Arise, fair knight, and kill the envious rook
Who is already pale and sick with grief"
Algebraic notation:
22. Qe8 Nxd8
Yeah, that was pretty damn funny...
I dare not ask your opinion on all the goings on.The things you must of seen! You might go away.