Maybe so, but I did write "forums" as in plural, not just this one. And yeah, if somebody wants to ridicule another for no reason at all, then that is bullying, and I am proud to call out the bully, no matter what form the bullying may take. And if my attack is in fact harsher than those I criticize, that still does not make me hypocritical, since I direct mine towards those who bring it on themselves, whereas they direct their attacks to the easiest target they can find. Not the same.
NEW CHESS RULE!!!
Sort:
he may be on to something. a lot of the chess communitty plays other types of chess at tournaments. bughouse for example. i think chess.com should embrace these fun games. i don't play them but i'm sure a large portion of chess players dabble in the area.
Vance917 wrote:
Maybe so, but I did write "forums" as in plural, not just this one. And yeah, if somebody wants to ridicule another for no reason at all, then that is bullying, and I am proud to call out the bully, no matter what form the bullying may take. And if my attack is in fact harsher than those I criticize, that still does not make me hypocritical, since I direct mine towards those who bring it on themselves, whereas they direct their attacks to the easiest target they can find. Not the same.
But the mockers have a reason. They believe the idea to be ridiculous, so they ridiculed it mildly.
Your harsh attack is hypocritical in that you are judge and jury for what merits your disproportionate response while the mockers' don't enjoy the same privileges in your eyes.
As for directing their attacks to the easiest targets they can find, not so. Prawny, for one, doesn't shrink from a jerky and personal challenge. I can list serveral more of the "forum mockers" who don't mind a litle heat given and taken.
It seems the solution, again, is to get over what amounts to nothing, these sour baby faces.
Gil-Gandel wrote:
I guess the point is that if you're Capablanca then you can suggest that the board needs to be enlarged and two new pieces introduced to reduce the number of draws; or if you're Fischer you can suggest that the pieces should not begin on the same squares every game; and at least people will listen even if they ultimately reject your ideas. But if you're a Johnny-come-lately and, on the available evidence, a nebbish who barely knows the first thing about the game, and you come wading in proclaiming to have seen the light, you're likely to
get a PALATR for your pains. Before you can expect to be taken seriously over any proposal to radically revise the game, you need to demonstrate that your understanding of it in its
existing form is second to none.
Post of the thread award to this man please.
OK, you may have a point. You are correct that I am acting based on my own assumptions, and not verifying them with anybody else. But my assumptions seem reasonable (OK, I'll preempt your challenge here by noting that anybody will tautologically find his or her own assumptions reasonable). I may be missing something, but I did not find the original post to be at all "out there" or deserving of ridicule. I can see the merit in the idea, and in my view, no idea with any merit at all should be ridiculed. I can read both far left and far right publications taking diametrically opposed views on the same point, and still not mock either side. That is not to say that I never mock them; some ideas have no merit and should be mocked. But when there is merit, then that is enough for some modicum of respect; I do not need to actually agree with an idea to respect it. So when I saw the ridicule in this forum, and overlaid it with much the same that goes on in other forums, yes, I saw that as bullying, and I struck back, but what I did, at least in my mind, was standing up to bullies.
not a possible rule change... as at the highest level your probably one move from mate any way you look at it.. also it would completely eliminate the point of "Tempo" in chess.. whts the point of being 1 step ahead.. if in the end you just give up that ONE step.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Light-hearted comedians is mainly what they seem to me. Sure, they have a guy slipping on a banana peel, but there's no harm being done in fact, unless one is quite fragile.
Invent another chess variant.
Arkfan's idea is kinda similar to what they had in ancient Shatranj:
Capturing all one's opponent's pieces apart from the king (baring the king) was a win, unless your opponent could capture your last piece on his or her next move, then in most parts of the Islamic world it was a draw(...)
(source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shatranj#Rules)
It still sucks, though.
Vance917 wrote:
browni3141 wrote:
Vance917 wrote:
Why are so many of you giving this guy a hard time? Whether you agree or not, at least he raises an interesting point. And since chess has evolved, there is in fact a precedent for rules to change, and who can truly say that the rules will never change again? There are many variations on chess as we speak, some of them quite popular, and this may become one of those, and some elements of those variations may someday make it into what we call "chess" the game. So I applaud the idea.
People on this forum are jerks. I try not to be but I probably am sometimes. I don't like the OP's idea, but I'm not going to mock him for it.
Sorry to disappoint you, but it sounds like you are not a jerk at all. And you are right about others being jerks here in the forums, presumably to justify their pathetic existences. I suppose if that's what it takes to get them through their days, to each his own, right?
That is an incredibly strange presumption. Jerks are, most often, skeptical types who don't suffer fools gladly.
Them skeptics don't need justification for existence. Hell! they usually aren't so cocksure they exist at all.
lets try to keep the debates over who is a jerk to a minimum and focus on a topic.
Great. Now the police are here.
Psssst...bigpoison has keestered his stash.
The topic blows. Givin' Vance hell is much more fun.
goldendog wrote:
Great. Now the police are here.
They get younger every year.
It looks like he's 13 today!
Happy b-day to you....
Double checkmate? yuck!