Originally posted by deeploserQuestion is what are the rules. Do they say that you cannot comment on current games except for ones with an easy answer? If not then the right thing to do is offer a draw at least. If you were sitting across from the opponent and didn't know the answer I'm sure you wouldn't get up and google for an answer. If you can google for the answer then you could also turn on fritz or chess master for the answer which is also a no no. A good thing to do is draw the game and set up the position in a program and play it out so you know how to do it in the future because that position will come up again for sure.
What if someone asks what are good books on the endgame? But he has like 23 games going on in the endgame and you tell him the books?
Originally posted by JusuhYes, there is a reason for that as well. In CC, as you know, games can be very long. Therefore it would be ridiculous to expect players to look at any books or databases within that time and try and avoid reading about a position which happens to be in one of their games.
I thought only opening databases were allowed. Well, no day passes by without me learning something new.
1 edit
Originally posted by hamltnblueI think the best solution is that if someone asks the question, then answer it generally.
Question is what are the rules. Do they say that you cannot comment on current games except for ones with an easy answer? If not then the right thing to do is offer a draw at least. If you were sitting across from the opponent and didn't know the answer I'm sure you wouldn't get up and google for an answer. If you can google for the answer then you co ...[text shortened]... out so you know how to do it in the future because that position will come up again for sure.
For example, in this case say:
Generally, you can checkmate K+Q vs K, but it is up to you to figure out how to do it in the particular game in question.
You could give an example game set up which does not match up in position to the game in question and show how to do it in that example.
Afterall, you aren't really directly telling the player what move to make in their current game.
EDIT: You could have several games currently in progress which is K+Q vs K, but cannot be bad to ask, "Is it possible to win K+Q vs K?".
Originally posted by JusuhSince the internet is a giant distributed database it's fine. But you can't use endgame tablebases (EGTB) because they are created by a brute force calculation. This means that you can't use online EGTB lookups (they do exist) to solve your endgame problems. So people need to be aware of that.
I thought only opening databases were allowed. Well, no day passes by without me learning something new.
1 edit
Originally posted by lauseyI can see where you're coming from but even this is risky. The initial poster was considering offering a draw. Any answer which indirectly advises whether or not to make that draw offer isn't general enough even it if was intended as such. It will influence a specific move with regards to whether that move includes a draw offer or not.
I think the best solution is that if someone asks the question, then answer it generally.
If someone asked what move to make in a specific middlegame position, I can't make comments like "in this type of position White generally attacks on the kingside" even although it appears to be general.
My last comment is that I don't regard this issue as being a huge crime. We're not talking about cheating engine users, etc. We're often talking about genuine people not realising they are making contraversial comments.
Originally posted by Varenka3. YOUR REGISTRATION OBLIGATIONS
My last comment is that I don't regard this issue as being a huge crime. We're not talking about cheating engine users, etc. We're often talking about genuine people not realising they are making contraversial comments.
(b) You will not use chess engines, chess software, chess computers or consult any third party to assist you in any game. Chess books and databases can be consulted during play
D
Originally posted by RagnorakThat is a rather Kafkanian reaction. Nobody is arguing that the question was illegal w.r.t. ToS. But if you were to judge this offense, what would you do? I would support a simple warning to who started the thread, and severe warning to a few of the replying members. But not worth half a point to either.
3. YOUR REGISTRATION OBLIGATIONS
(b) You will not use chess engines, chess software, chess computers or [b]consult any third party to assist you in any game. Chess books and databases can be consulted during play
D[/b]
Originally posted by Mephisto2My only point was that the TOS doesn't differentiate between "huge crimes" of engine use, and asking others for help in in-progress games.
That is a rather Kafkanian reaction. Nobody is arguing that the question was illegal w.r.t. ToS. But if you were to judge this offense, what would you do? I would support a simple warning to who started the thread, and severe warning to a few of the replying members. But not worth half a point to either.
D
Originally posted by RagnorakI agree.
My only point was that the TOS doesn't differentiate between "huge crimes" of engine use, and asking others for help in in-progress games.
D
I was just trying to separate the "parking fine violations" from the "serial killers". Both break the law, but it doesn't make them equivalent. The TOS may not differentiate but our attitude towards others can differentiate.