Originally posted by Phlabibit Only if he read this thread.
Do you know if he did? I doubt it, I see this user has never posted in the forums, so I doubt they read the forums.
Do you dispute what I've said about games in progress? What's with the spinning eyes face? Explain what's so kookie.
P-
Referring someone to the rules, and telling them what rule to look at are almost the same thing.
You accused me in your last post of knowingly giving advice, and helping and (cheating) and giving a advantage to him in this game. That's kookie to me because it never happened.
And then you question if he even knows en passant right after you claim I cheated by telling him all about it. I've never talked with Chuck. Kookie.🙄
I think it's very clear to most that I meant no harm and that I meant no foul with the help I gave in the help forum with the original post.
Originally posted by KingDavid403 Referring someone to the rules, and telling them what rule to look at are almost the same thing.
You accused me in your last post of knowingly giving advice, and helping and (cheating) and giving a advantage to him in this game. That's kookie to me because it never happened.
And then you question if he even knows en passant right after you claim I cheated by telling him all about it. I've never talked with Chuck. Kookie.🙄
I think telling someone THE rule and telling them to read ALL rules is a bit different.
I think you shouldn't have, these threads often come up and players should figure out on their own, not be spoon fed the answer on a game in progress.
I wasn't trying to make you the villain here, I just don't think you should have answered the way you did.
Monty Moose seems to agree, but I could be wrong. Would be nice if the rule was more clear.
Originally posted by Phlabibit I think telling someone THE rule and telling them to read ALL rules is a bit different.
I think you shouldn't have, these threads often come up and players should figure out on their own, not be spoon fed the answer on a game in progress.
I wasn't trying to make you the villain here, I just don't think you should have answered the way you did.
M ...[text shortened]... Moose seems to agree, but I could be wrong. Would be nice if the rule was more clear.
P-
Maybe you're right. I will be more careful in the future.
As I said before I was only trying to help and I meant no harm, and I certainly didn't mean to give any advice or advantage or cheat for anyone. I didn't see at the time that I was doing anything wrong.
Now I know that some have a problem with the way I answered his post. I will be more careful in the future.
Absolutely. It was nothing personal against you KD, just a situation of a few more experienced players (and posters!) discussing a newbie problem that comes up every now and then and seeing where each other stood on the subject. The game is over and Hank's opponent resigned. I hope both players now know all the rules. 🙂
Originally posted by SwissGambit Heh, if I can remind someone of the rules, I can do this:
[fen]8/2P5/8/8/3r4/8/2K5/k7 w - - 0 1[/fen]
White to move
"Remember, the rules allow you to promote a pawn to a Rook..."
...and possibly save the guy from blowing the win with 1.c8Q??? Rc4+! 2.Qxc4 stalemate.
No, you tell them to go read ALL rules like we've said earlier. What you are doing is Telling them the exact rule, and that's what I've been saying "NOT" to do.
Or are you talking to someone else?
What question was asked that you would ever give this answer?
Originally posted by SwissGambit Heh, if I can remind someone of the rules, I can do this:
[fen]8/2P5/8/8/3r4/8/2K5/k7 w - - 0 1[/fen]
White to move
"Remember, the rules allow you to promote a pawn to a Rook..."
...and possibly save the guy from blowing the win with 1.c8Q??? Rc4+! 2.Qxc4 stalemate.
I don't see your point. Your presented situation has nothing to do with the original situation (post) in question. And it is a completely different scenario covering a whole different rule of chess, and it is off topic.
If you can't tell the difference you need help.
No one helped or told anyone were to move or what piece to turn their pawn into to save a game in the original posts. The original poster thought there was a site glitch, He thought he had checkmate. I made a mistake and told him no you don't and I told him why due to a rule of chess. My bad. I didn't tell his opponent anything. Al tho there was a chance he could have read the post himself. My mistake.
Originally posted by Phlabibit I think telling someone THE rule and telling them to read ALL rules is a bit different.
I think you shouldn't have, these threads often come up and players should figure out on their own, not be spoon fed the answer on a game in progress.
I wasn't trying to make you the villain here, I just don't think you should have answered the way you did.
M ...[text shortened]... Moose seems to agree, but I could be wrong. Would be nice if the rule was more clear.
P-
I'm sorry I over reacted. I took it personal because I made the mistake. And my intentions were to only help without breaking any rules..
I do see your point and I think you and Monty are mostly right. As I said before I will be more careful in the future. I'm moving on now. 🙂 And it might be by boat due to the flooding going on here. 😲 :'(
Originally posted by KingDavid403 I'm sorry I over reacted. I took it personal because I made the mistake. And my intentions were to only help without breaking any rules..
I do see your point and I think you and Monty are mostly right. As I said before I will be more careful in the future. I'm moving on now. 🙂 And it might be by boat due to the flooding going on here. 😲 :'(
No shame in trying to help someone in the help forum, KD.
Originally posted by Phlabibit No, you tell them to go read ALL rules like we've said earlier. What you are doing is Telling them the exact rule, and that's what I've been saying "NOT" to do.
Or are you talking to someone else?
What question was asked that you would ever give this answer?
P-
Mainly, I posted it for the lulz - having a little fun with the idea that I could direct a player's attention to a specific chess rule applicable to a game in progress.
There have been a few in the thread who have insisted that 'players have the right to know the rules' - I am speaking to them. I'm in agreement with your take on the matter.
Originally posted by KingDavid403 I don't see your point. Your presented situation has nothing to do with the original situation (post) in question. And it is a completely different scenario covering a whole different rule of chess, and it is off topic.
If you can't tell the difference you need help.
No one helped or told anyone were to move or what piece to turn their pawn in ...[text shortened]... onent anything. Al tho there was a chance he could have read the post himself. My mistake.
I don't see your point. Your presented situation has nothing to do with the original situation (post) in question. And it is a completely different scenario covering a whole different rule of chess, and it is off topic.
If you can't tell the difference you need help.
OK, I'll connect the dots for you.
Let's say the guy playing Black comes on here and complains about a site glitch. "I have checkmate - there is a bug in the site!"
Would you then inform him of the promotion rule?
[Can you see why it doesn't matter in the slightest that it involves a different rule than en passant now?]
Black has just played ...b7-b5+, and both players think that black has checkmate.
And then someone on a forum says "look up the en passant rule!" thus allowing white to win instead of black, even though both were ignorant of the rule.
Originally posted by SwissGambit [b]I don't see your point. Your presented situation has nothing to do with the original situation (post) in question. And it is a completely different scenario covering a whole different rule of chess, and it is off topic.
If you can't tell the difference you need help.
OK, I'll connect the dots for you.
[fen]2r4K/6P1/7k/8/8/8/8/8 w - - 't matter in the slightest that it involves a different rule than en passant now?][/b]
Can you see why it doesn't matter in the slightest that it involves a different rule than en passant now?] What did I say in my last posts? You're beating a dead horse. I'm glad you're having fun with it even after the issue had been settled. And your hypothetical set pieces have nothing to do with the original game or problem, and don't even relate in this situation. Cheers.
Originally posted by KingDavid403 [b]Can you see why it doesn't matter in the slightest that it involves a different rule than en passant now?] What did I say in my last posts? You're beating a dead horse. I'm glad you're having fun with it even after the issue had been settled. And your hypothetical set pieces have nothing to do with the original game or problem, and don't even relate in this situation. Cheers.[/b]
Originally posted by SwissGambit I bet you didn't even look at the last example...
Yes I did. But it does not relate to this game or problem. Because it's a hypothesis. And I never responded to a game that had the set pieces of your hypothesis. So you see it does not relate.
Checkmate?
26 Mar '09 16:362 edits
Back to Top