Originally posted by Draxus Dude, you don't have to be a jerk about it.
This forum, if I am not mistaken, is "site ideas." He had an "idea" for the "site." I don't see a problem with people giving out ideas...
This idea is suggested once a month by someone who doesn't seem to understand what correspondence chess actually is. To be honest it's getting kind of old.
Originally posted by Dr Strangelove Some of the slow play is hard to understand - yeah it's a correspondence chess site but as far as I know the reason correspondence chess had so long between moves was to allow for the postal services to deliver the moves - on the internet that is a non-existant reason.
People also play CC because it gives them longer to think about moves, play several games at once, combine chess with their normal lives.
There is nothing stopping two people here agreeing to play quickly and doing so, but as others have said, it's not a blitz site.
Originally posted by XanthosNZ This idea is suggested once a month by someone who doesn't seem to understand what correspondence chess actually is. To be honest it's getting kind of old.
Ahh...so that must be when Captain "I have to monitor the boards" Xan comes in. Are you a moderator? Or is it just your responsibility to make sure that the boards comply with your own taste?
Originally posted by Draxus Ahh...so that must be when Captain "I have to monitor the boards" Xan comes in. Are you a moderator? Or is it just your responsibility to make sure that the boards comply with your own taste?
And just what are you doing now? That's right, criticizing someone who offends your personal standards of taste. It's called a forum, and it's a helluva lot more interesting when people actually express strong opinions.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem And just what are you doing now? That's right, criticizing someone who offends your personal standards of taste. It's called a forum, and it's a helluva lot more interesting when people actually express strong opinions.
It isn't called a "strong opinion," it is called "flaming." Perhaps it is borderline "trolling." It has nothing to do with taste and everything to do with people treating others like crap.
Originally posted by XanthosNZ This idea is suggested once a month by someone who doesn't seem to understand what correspondence chess actually is. To be honest it's getting kind of old.
hey... come on everyone understands whtat coorespondent chess is.. its obvious... but a quick game is fun for a couple of hours... thats all!
Originally posted by geckos hey... come on everyone understands whtat coorespondent chess is.. its obvious... but a quick game is fun for a couple of hours... thats all!
Are you lost?
"Play online correspondence chess through a feature-rich, browser interface against your friends or existing members."
(emphasis not mine)
Originally posted by Draxus It isn't called a "strong opinion," it is called "flaming." Perhaps it is borderline "trolling." It has nothing to do with taste and everything to do with people treating others like crap.
It was one sentence suggesting that blitz chess is better played somewhere else. Trust me, you're waaaay too sensitive to handle the RHP forums if that constitutes 'flaming' in your eyes.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem It was one sentence suggesting that blitz chess is better played somewhere else. Trust me, you're waaaay too sensitive to handle the RHP forums if that constitutes 'flaming' in your eyes.
Refer to my first post for reasons why I feel it is flaming. Sensitivity has nothing to do with it 🙂
Originally posted by BigDoggProblem Your reasons are inadequate. Those who post bad site ideas should not be surprised when the idea is criticized.
If you think my reasons are inadequate then either 1. you can't read or 2. you are skewing and distorting what you read. I believe you are inadvertently doing the latter so that you can feel like you are winning an argument.
You have a problem with definitions. Let me help you a bit.
Criticism is not defined by meritless and inflammatory flaming.
The term "Strong Opinions" isn't either.
Criticism = criticism
Opinions = opinions
Flaming = flaming
Look them up if you wish, but Criticism isn't flaming
Originally posted by Draxus If you think my reasons are inadequate then either 1. you can't read or 2. you are skewing and distorting what you read. I believe you are inadvertently doing the latter so that you can feel like you are winning an argument.
You have a problem with definitions. Let me help you a bit.
Criticism is not defined by meritless and inflammatory flaming.
T ...[text shortened]... ns = opinions
Flaming = flaming
Look them up if you wish, but Criticism isn't flaming
I think I'm drowning,
Asphyxiated.
I wanna break this spell,
That you've created.
You're something beautiful,
A contradiction.
I wanna play the game,
I want the friction.
13 Apr '06 12:11
blitz chess
Back to Top