Victorian Teams Championship 2010 - Page 13 - OzChess

**Firegoat7** · 08-26-2010, 06:32 PM

Originally Posted by Pablito15

As Grant said, the MCC helped Box Hill out by reschudling the time- it seems a bit oversensitive to badmouth the club on a public forum and in a newsletter due to having to set 4 clocks.

Paul, I don't think it really is a BOX HILL/MCC us versus them scenario. More like, a cultural clash between differing environments for playing chess. Some people, ( not an essentialised BOX HILL CC), just can't grasp the culture of the home team because it so alien to them. They are expressing that opinion and there is nothing wrong with doing that. Of course, their opinion is just that, rightly or wrongly, and clearly others disagree with it.

cheers,

**JaK** · 08-26-2010, 07:41 PM

Originally Posted by MOZ

So, where would you recommend the Guru post if he wanted to engage on this issue JaK? Certainly not Ozchess, because Kerry's sentiments have not been supported by anyone here.

MOZ! Stop for 5-10 seconds!
Now think of the question you just asked me!
ChessGuru is quoting from where MOZ?
From OZchess? Obviously NOT!
From ChessChat? Obviously NOT since the "Interclub chess isn't working" phrase was not included in Kerry's post there!
Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the "Interclub chess isn't working" statement?
If yes, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao!
If no, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao!

**JaK** · 08-26-2010, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by Comeback Kid

Sorry - My bad.

lol no worries mate, we all make mistakes, look at MOZ! He can't get his facts right in regards to results, ladders, next round draws reports, names of participants on the DGT boards etc to save his life!

BTW you guys are missing great opportunities to promote fantastic chessic news in Victoria and in particular BHCC's activities such as:
Staging one of the most important national veterans events next year
Having the ex President and current V/President of the Club as a candidate MP for the oncoming State elections in a winnable seat and a winnable position. If that happens we will be having the first State Parliamentarian who is at the same time a chess fan and mother of two of our strongest junior players!
A great sponsorship deal coming up to the Club from a major financial organisation.
All these and more are events which should be promoted in a Forum that prides itself for being pro Victorian.
I hope you agree with me that coverage of this kind of events would have been much more interesting, helpful and constructive than childish bickering of the kind that has recently developed in this thread!

**The Analyst** · 08-26-2010, 10:13 PM

It is dismaying to read ill-tempered comments about the running of what has been a mostly well conceived, run and enjoyed Victorian interclub competition. Kerry Lyall may be of the opinion that the competition "isn't working", but compared to the previous incarnation of Vic interclub, the current edition's pluses clearly outweight the minuses in this writer's opinion.

Pluses:
- The competition involves a much wider range of clubs. The previous incarnation of Interclub was virtually monopolised by BHCC teams, while the current version has teams from most (maybe all) of the active clubs in Melbourne, as well as a few from outlying areas. This plus, in my opinion, is of great importance to having an Interclub competition of any worth and is a huge benefit to Victorian chess generally.

- The competition exposes players to different clubs. My understanding is that the format of having "home" and "away" teams developed from the fact that the current Interclub evolved from a number of home and away matches involving MCC, Ranges CC, Noble Park CC and Hobson Bay CC. This set-up encourages people to become acquainted with clubs which they would not normally visit. This can only be a good thing to both the hosting and visiting club. The previous incarnation of Interclub had all games set at BHCC.

- The current systems builds interclub relationships. A diverse competition that forces participants to engage with each other, not only at the board, but also in arranging matches, can only help develop further communication between clubs.

- There is flexibility in the current arrangements of setting matches. With the exception of MCC, none of the clubs are open all the time. Therefore a competition that allows for flexibility to cater for players who are only able to normally at certain days of the week will enable those players to participate.

Minuses:
- The rules of the competitions are uncertain. The competition is new (the current model began this year), so there will naturally be teething problems with competition rules. For example, there are no rules or protocols to deal with late arrivals of teams (particularly the host team), other than the forfeit rule of loss of game after 30 minutes. Similarly, there is little guidance on how postponement of matches should occur (e.g. how soon prior to the match may a postponement be requested? Who should be informed of such postponements?) other than such postponement form part of the arrangements which team captains/mangers may agree upon. One would assume that these issues by the competition organisers in due course.

- The control of the running of the competition is more decentralised. Ideally, Chess Victoria would provide a neutral DOP to oversee all matches. But this is not currently a realistic proposition. So there is a reliance on team managers and captain to come to arrangements. If there should be disagreements, then resolution of these may become very difficult if there are not strong relationships between clubs.

As for the complaint and its publication, I agree with the sentiment that it has been unhelpful and unfair. As noted above, Interclub should be a chance to build relationships. In this regard, the public airing of the complaint, especially in a club newsletter, has been unhelpful. The complaint read as a attack on the MCC, which did not the opportunity to respond in the newsletter - this was unfair.

At the very least, the complaint ought to have been addressed to both Chess Victoria, as competition organisers, and the MCC, before the complaint was published (and only then if the complaint was not addressed by either Chess Victoria or the MCC). Furthermore, it was not clear that the complaint as expressed in the newsletter represented only the personal opinion of Kerry Lyall. This should have been expressed in the newsletter much more clearly than merely stating that Kerry Lyall "had this to say" - in what capacity was she saying what she said?

**Pablito15** · 08-26-2010, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by Firegoat7

Paul, I don't think it really is a BOX HILL/MCC us versus them scenario. More like, a cultural clash between differing environments for playing chess. Some people, ( not an essentialised BOX HILL CC), just can't grasp the culture of the home team because it so alien to them. They are expressing that opinion and there is nothing wrong with doing that. Of course, their opinion is just that, rightly or wrongly, and clearly others disagree with it.

cheers,

Hey Dave,
I don't take it as an MCC - BoxHill thing but it looks like someone else (the person who made the original comments and felt it necessary to badmouth the MCC without acknowledging the effort it made to accomodate this 4 person BHCC team) does.

**antichrist** · 08-26-2010, 11:45 PM

Originally Posted by antichrist

Should that be to, too or two???

It seems Moz has gone to ground after been exposed by above and below:

JAK
lol no worries mate, we all make mistakes, look at MOZ! He can't get his facts right in regards to results, ladders, next round draws reports, names of participants on the DGT boards etc to save his life!

AC
Now Moz we all still love you - come back and remove those stitches

**MOZ** · 08-27-2010, 12:11 AM

Originally Posted by JaK

MOZ! Stop for 5-10 seconds!

OK, you have my full attention.

Originally Posted by JaK

Now think of the question you just asked me!

Originally Posted by JaK

ChessGuru is quoting from where MOZ?

The newsletter obviously, because it had more of Kerry's text than her chesschat post.

Originally Posted by JaK

From OZchess? Obviously NOT!

Hey, I said that first, in my first post,

Originally Posted by JaK

From ChessChat? Obviously NOT since the "Interclub chess isn't working" phrase was not included in Kerry's post there!
Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the "Interclub chess isn't working" statement?

No, what you suggest is not logical at all.
On this topic, I count chesschat has already 7 posts, and Ozchess has already 24 posts. That is, 31 in total. Now, if you think the newsletter is the appropriate and timely place to have 31 Letters to the Editor, then that would strike me as an unwieldy solution.

The Guru wants to hear from the authoress of the text. The only place she posts is chesschat. Clearly, that is where the engagement is most appropriate.

regards
MOZ*

**antichrist** · 08-27-2010, 12:14 AM

And Moz which to/too/two should it have been - I certainly was your pied piper

**MOZ** · 08-27-2010, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by antichrist

And Moz which to/too/two should it have been - I certainly was your pied piper

Good morning a/c.

Ok matey, I finally get around to your contribution.
And it is not really a contribution is it, eh?
It is just you being 'erstaz spell-check police'.
Not your best work.

Nothing in your post that is germane to the point of the thread nor the current issue. No; just a demonstration that sometimes you lose your mojo.

I will be helpful though.
Here is a list of some of your highlights reel:
St George
FIDE
Pope
Tarmac
Spaghetti with chilli sauce and snow peas.
Carrier Pigeon.

Hope these will get you re-started.

regards
MOZ*

ps If you want move on from spell-check to something harder, I can lend you a pamphlet on orthoepy.

**Just2Good** · 08-27-2010, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by JaK

BTW you guys are missing great opportunities to promote fantastic chessic news in Victoria and in particular BHCC's activities such as:
Staging one of the most important national veterans events next year
Having the ex President and current V/President of the Club as a candidate MP for the oncoming State elections in a winnable seat and a winnable position. If that happens we will be having the first State Parliamentarian who is at the same time a chess fan and mother of two of our strongest junior players!
A great sponsorship deal coming up to the Club from a major financial organisation.
All these and more are events which should be promoted in a Forum that prides itself for being pro Victorian.
I hope you agree with me that coverage of this kind of events would have been much more interesting, helpful and constructive than childish bickering of the kind that has recently developed in this thread!

I agree that coverage of these events would be worthwhile, however, a forum needs to be more than one person. I feel I have done all I can for this place.

It is technologically superior to any other chess forum in the world, has two excellent pgn chess viewers, a great layout, speed, and search engine optimization. It has a ton of wonderful features, but the fact is - all I could do is build the place. Its up to chess players themselves to come and participate and report on these events.

Sometimes I ask myself whether this place is really worthwhile. A recent poll here overwhelming voted that yes - OzChess is worthwhile and should not be taken down. People want a board that is not dominated by ACF brass, especially chess players from Victoria it would seem.

But I will tell you this Elliott, at the end of December I will be tallying the stats, and if they are not an improvement or at least steady - I will be recommending to Matt that OzChess be discontinued.

**antichrist** · 08-28-2010, 12:12 AM

Originally Posted by Comeback Kid

I agree that coverage of these events would be worthwhile, however, a forum needs to be more than one person. I feel I have done all I can for this place.

It is technologically superior to any other chess forum in the world, has two excellent pgn chess viewers, a great layout, speed, and search engine optimization. It has a ton of wonderful features, but the fact is - all I could do is build the place. Its up to chess players themselves to come and participate and report on these events.

Sometimes I ask myself whether this place is really worthwhile. A recent poll here overwhelming voted that yes - OzChess is worthwhile and should not be taken down. People want a board that is not dominated by ACF brass, especially chess players from Victoria it would seem.

But I will tell you this Elliott, at the end of December I will be tallying the stats, and if they are not an improvement or at least steady - I will be recommending to Matt that OzChess be discontinued.

Do possible law suits assoc with the site also become jeopardised? Like opposite of double jeopardy being zero jeopardy?

Poor Axiom will be lost at sea - you will have his life in your hands. I will be forced to behave myself at CC or be in no man's land. Moz will have to return to the surgeon and have those stitches removed. Matt will have to wash his mouth out to be allowed back in Cc. You will have stop defaming people to get your pass to get around go. FG will have stop fighting everyone and sundry. And Jaydon will have to dissassociate from SCT.
And the only people who will be happy will be KB and BillG - you will make their day - that is if you can still sleep at nite. And I wil go and join the Palestinian site instead - that will teach you.

**Axiom** · 08-28-2010, 12:33 AM

Originally Posted by antichrist

And Jaydon will have to dissassociate from SCT.

Yeah , right ,.... when hell freezes over .

**MOZ** · 08-29-2010, 11:13 AM

Originally Posted by MOZ

...

No, what you suggest is not logical at all.
On this topic, I count chesschat has already 7 posts, and Ozchess has already 24 posts. That is, 31 in total. Now, if you think the newsletter is the appropriate and timely place to have 31 Letters to the Editor, then that would strike me as an unwieldy solution.

Well JaK you have not taken the opportunity to argue against my answer to your question

Originally Posted by JaK View Post

Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the "Interclub chess isn't working" statement?

Do you still stand by your suggestion given that we see now there have been 31 responses on the topic on the two chat-boards, and 31 Letters to the Editor would have been an unwieldy solution.

I stand by helpful advice I gave CG.

The Guru wants to hear from the authoress of the text. The only place she posts is chesschat. Clearly, that is where the engagement is most appropriate.

You JaK have not made a case for CG not engaging on chesschat, instead of Ozchess. Have you capitulated?

MOZ*

**JaK** · 08-29-2010, 11:58 AM

Originally Posted by MOZ

You JaK have not made a case for CG not engaging on chesschat, instead of Ozchess. Have you capitulated?

No way, you have obviously missed my

Originally Posted by MOZ

Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the "Interclub chess isn't working" statement?
If yes, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao!
If no, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao!

Another subtle point, which you may have also missed, is that despite your desparate efforts none (I repeat NONE) has followed your rather weak (not to say ridiculous) advice -which you still stand for (not even ChessGuru himself)! Why should he anyway? If he wanted to he would have done so (without your advice) in the first place! After all that's where he cut and pasted his material from in the first place!

So, no capitulation. You 've lost! that's all, no more!

**MOZ** · 08-29-2010, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by JaK

No way, you have obviously missed my

Another subtle point, which you may have also missed, is that despite your desparate efforts none (I repeat NONE) has followed your rather weak (not to say ridiculous) advice -which you still stand for (not even ChessGuru himself)! Why should he anyway? If he wanted to he would have done so (without your advice) in the first place! After all that's where he cut and pasted his material from in the first place!

So, no capitulation. You 've lost! that's all, no more!

Why should he JaK? Because he was probably unaware that Kerry does not post here, and he apparently wanted to engage with the author of the remarks.

And no, he did not cut and paste from chesschat. He cut and pasted from the Newsletter. In fact you pointed out on chesschat that he cut-and-pasted from the Newsletter, here. Are you losing track?

08-26-2010, 06:32 PM	#181 (permalink)
Firegoat7 Moderator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Getting owned by White in the Dragon and trying to recover lost positions from shock paralysis OTB Posts: 2,044 ICC Handle: guest	Originally Posted by Pablito15 As Grant said, the MCC helped Box Hill out by reschudling the time- it seems a bit oversensitive to badmouth the club on a public forum and in a newsletter due to having to set 4 clocks. Paul, I don't think it really is a BOX HILL/MCC us versus them scenario. More like, a cultural clash between differing environments for playing chess. Some people, ( not an essentialised BOX HILL CC), just can't grasp the culture of the home team because it so alien to them. They are expressing that opinion and there is nothing wrong with doing that. Of course, their opinion is just that, rightly or wrongly, and clearly others disagree with it. cheers, __________________ "...What I meant? Dear Mr Ian Rout (ACF news publisher) could you please put Ozchessforum in the next news letter! There is no reason to hide this forum from the Australian chess public. What they meant? Sorry, No english!- Amir Karibasic

08-26-2010, 07:41 PM	#182 (permalink)
JaK Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 391	MOZ, think! Originally Posted by MOZ So, where would you recommend the Guru post if he wanted to engage on this issue JaK? Certainly not Ozchess, because Kerry's sentiments have not been supported by anyone here. MOZ! Stop for 5-10 seconds! Now think of the question you just asked me! ChessGuru is quoting from where MOZ? From OZchess? Obviously NOT! From ChessChat? Obviously NOT since the *"Interclub chess isn't working"* phrase was not included in Kerry's post there! Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the *"Interclub chess isn't working"* statement? If yes, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao! If no, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao!

08-26-2010, 07:58 PM	#183 (permalink)
JaK Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 391	happens! Originally Posted by Comeback Kid Sorry - My bad. lol no worries mate, we all make mistakes, look at MOZ! He can't get his facts right in regards to results, ladders, next round draws reports, names of participants on the DGT boards etc to save his life! BTW you guys are missing great opportunities to promote fantastic chessic news in Victoria and in particular BHCC's activities such as: Staging one of the most important national veterans events next year Having the ex President and current V/President of the Club as a candidate MP for the oncoming State elections in a winnable seat and a winnable position. If that happens we will be having the first State Parliamentarian who is at the same time a chess fan and mother of two of our strongest junior players! A great sponsorship deal coming up to the Club from a major financial organisation. All these and more are events which should be promoted in a Forum that prides itself for being pro Victorian. I hope you agree with me that coverage of this kind of events would have been much more interesting, helpful and constructive than childish bickering of the kind that has recently developed in this thread!

08-26-2010, 11:34 PM	#185 (permalink)
Pablito15 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 668	Originally Posted by Firegoat7 Paul, I don't think it really is a BOX HILL/MCC us versus them scenario. More like, a cultural clash between differing environments for playing chess. Some people, ( not an essentialised BOX HILL CC), just can't grasp the culture of the home team because it so alien to them. They are expressing that opinion and there is nothing wrong with doing that. Of course, their opinion is just that, rightly or wrongly, and clearly others disagree with it. cheers, Hey Dave, I don't take it as an MCC - BoxHill thing but it looks like someone else (the person who made the original comments and felt it necessary to badmouth the MCC without acknowledging the effort it made to accomodate this 4 person BHCC team) does. __________________ My Blog!

08-26-2010, 11:45 PM	#186 (permalink)
antichrist Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Byron Bay, NSW Posts: 2,821	Originally Posted by antichrist Should that be to, too or two??? It seems Moz has gone to ground after been exposed by above and below: JAK lol no worries mate, we all make mistakes, look at MOZ! He can't get his facts right in regards to results, ladders, next round draws reports, names of participants on the DGT boards etc to save his life! AC Now Moz we all still love you - come back and remove those stitches

08-26-2010, 10:13 PM	#184 (permalink)
The Analyst Member Join Date: May 2009 Posts: 38	It is dismaying to read ill-tempered comments about the running of what has been a mostly well conceived, run and enjoyed Victorian interclub competition. Kerry Lyall may be of the opinion that the competition "isn't working", but compared to the previous incarnation of Vic interclub, the current edition's pluses clearly outweight the minuses in this writer's opinion. Pluses: - The competition involves a much wider range of clubs. The previous incarnation of Interclub was virtually monopolised by BHCC teams, while the current version has teams from most (maybe all) of the active clubs in Melbourne, as well as a few from outlying areas. This plus, in my opinion, is of great importance to having an Interclub competition of any worth and is a huge benefit to Victorian chess generally. - The competition exposes players to different clubs. My understanding is that the format of having "home" and "away" teams developed from the fact that the current Interclub evolved from a number of home and away matches involving MCC, Ranges CC, Noble Park CC and Hobson Bay CC. This set-up encourages people to become acquainted with clubs which they would not normally visit. This can only be a good thing to both the hosting and visiting club. The previous incarnation of Interclub had all games set at BHCC. - The current systems builds interclub relationships. A diverse competition that forces participants to engage with each other, not only at the board, but also in arranging matches, can only help develop further communication between clubs. - There is flexibility in the current arrangements of setting matches. With the exception of MCC, none of the clubs are open all the time. Therefore a competition that allows for flexibility to cater for players who are only able to normally at certain days of the week will enable those players to participate. Minuses: - The rules of the competitions are uncertain. The competition is new (the current model began this year), so there will naturally be teething problems with competition rules. For example, there are no rules or protocols to deal with late arrivals of teams (particularly the host team), other than the forfeit rule of loss of game after 30 minutes. Similarly, there is little guidance on how postponement of matches should occur (e.g. how soon prior to the match may a postponement be requested? Who should be informed of such postponements?) other than such postponement form part of the arrangements which team captains/mangers may agree upon. One would assume that these issues by the competition organisers in due course. - The control of the running of the competition is more decentralised. Ideally, Chess Victoria would provide a neutral DOP to oversee all matches. But this is not currently a realistic proposition. So there is a reliance on team managers and captain to come to arrangements. If there should be disagreements, then resolution of these may become very difficult if there are not strong relationships between clubs. As for the complaint and its publication, I agree with the sentiment that it has been unhelpful and unfair. As noted above, Interclub should be a chance to build relationships. In this regard, the public airing of the complaint, especially in a club newsletter, has been unhelpful. The complaint read as a attack on the MCC, which did not the opportunity to respond in the newsletter - this was unfair. At the very least, the complaint ought to have been addressed to both Chess Victoria, as competition organisers, and the MCC, before the complaint was published (and only then if the complaint was not addressed by either Chess Victoria or the MCC). Furthermore, it was not clear that the complaint as expressed in the newsletter represented only the personal opinion of Kerry Lyall. This should have been expressed in the newsletter much more clearly than merely stating that Kerry Lyall "had this to say" - in what capacity was she saying what she said?

08-27-2010, 12:11 AM	#187 (permalink)
MOZ Volunteer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Ozchess is the marginalised cyber-spot where cc-Mods choose to engage with cc-banned posters. Posts: 3,541	Originally Posted by JaK MOZ! Stop for 5-10 seconds! OK, you have my full attention. Originally Posted by JaK Now think of the question you just asked me! Originally Posted by JaK ChessGuru is quoting from where MOZ? The newsletter obviously, because it had more of Kerry's text than her chesschat post. Originally Posted by JaK From OZchess? Obviously NOT! Hey, I said that first, in my first post, Originally Posted by JaK From ChessChat? Obviously NOT since the *"Interclub chess isn't working"* phrase was not included in Kerry's post there! Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the *"Interclub chess isn't working"* statement? No, what you suggest is not logical at all. On this topic, I count chesschat has already 7 posts, and Ozchess has already 24 posts. That is, 31 in total. Now, if you think the newsletter is the appropriate and timely place to have 31 Letters to the Editor, then that would strike me as an unwieldy solution. The Guru wants to hear from the authoress of the text. The only place she posts is chesschat. Clearly, that is where the engagement is most appropriate. regards MOZ* __________________ FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

08-27-2010, 12:14 AM	#188 (permalink)
antichrist Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Byron Bay, NSW Posts: 2,821	And Moz which to/too/two should it have been - I certainly was your pied piper

08-27-2010, 10:48 AM	#189 (permalink)
MOZ Volunteer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Ozchess is the marginalised cyber-spot where cc-Mods choose to engage with cc-banned posters. Posts: 3,541	Has his mojo a shelf-life finally? Originally Posted by antichrist And Moz which to/too/two should it have been - I certainly was your pied piper Good morning a/c. Ok matey, I finally get around to your contribution. And it is not really a contribution is it, eh? It is just you being 'erstaz spell-check police'. Not your best work. Nothing in your post that is germane to the point of the thread nor the current issue. No; just a demonstration that sometimes you lose your mojo. I will be helpful though. Here is a list of some of your highlights reel: St George FIDE Pope Tarmac Spaghetti with chilli sauce and snow peas. Carrier Pigeon. Hope these will get you re-started. regards MOZ* ps If you want move on from spell-check to something harder, I can lend you a pamphlet on orthoepy. __________________ FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

08-27-2010, 04:16 PM	#190 (permalink)
Just2Good Tin Cup Champ 2004 Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Cairns Posts: 6,233 ICC Handle: Advantage FICS Handle: Advantage	Future of OzChess? Originally Posted by JaK BTW you guys are missing great opportunities to promote fantastic chessic news in Victoria and in particular BHCC's activities such as: Staging one of the most important national veterans events next year Having the ex President and current V/President of the Club as a candidate MP for the oncoming State elections in a winnable seat and a winnable position. If that happens we will be having the first State Parliamentarian who is at the same time a chess fan and mother of two of our strongest junior players! A great sponsorship deal coming up to the Club from a major financial organisation. All these and more are events which should be promoted in a Forum that prides itself for being pro Victorian. I hope you agree with me that coverage of this kind of events would have been much more interesting, helpful and constructive than childish bickering of the kind that has recently developed in this thread! I agree that coverage of these events would be worthwhile, however, a forum needs to be more than one person. I feel I have done all I can for this place. It is technologically superior to any other chess forum in the world, has two excellent pgn chess viewers, a great layout, speed, and search engine optimization. It has a ton of wonderful features, but the fact is - all I could do is build the place. Its up to chess players themselves to come and participate and report on these events. Sometimes I ask myself whether this place is really worthwhile. A recent poll here overwhelming voted that yes - OzChess is worthwhile and should not be taken down. People want a board that is not dominated by ACF brass, especially chess players from Victoria it would seem. But I will tell you this Elliott, at the end of December I will be tallying the stats, and if they are not an improvement or at least steady - I will be recommending to Matt that OzChess be discontinued. __________________ . "The fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one big thing." ~ Isaiah Berlin ~

08-28-2010, 12:12 AM	#191 (permalink)
antichrist Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Byron Bay, NSW Posts: 2,821	Originally Posted by Comeback Kid I agree that coverage of these events would be worthwhile, however, a forum needs to be more than one person. I feel I have done all I can for this place. It is technologically superior to any other chess forum in the world, has two excellent pgn chess viewers, a great layout, speed, and search engine optimization. It has a ton of wonderful features, but the fact is - all I could do is build the place. Its up to chess players themselves to come and participate and report on these events. Sometimes I ask myself whether this place is really worthwhile. A recent poll here overwhelming voted that yes - OzChess is worthwhile and should not be taken down. People want a board that is not dominated by ACF brass, especially chess players from Victoria it would seem. But I will tell you this Elliott, at the end of December I will be tallying the stats, and if they are not an improvement or at least steady - I will be recommending to Matt that OzChess be discontinued. Do possible law suits assoc with the site also become jeopardised? Like opposite of double jeopardy being zero jeopardy? Poor Axiom will be lost at sea - you will have his life in your hands. I will be forced to behave myself at CC or be in no man's land. Moz will have to return to the surgeon and have those stitches removed. Matt will have to wash his mouth out to be allowed back in Cc. You will have stop defaming people to get your pass to get around go. FG will have stop fighting everyone and sundry. And Jaydon will have to dissassociate from SCT. And the only people who will be happy will be KB and BillG - you will make their day - that is if you can still sleep at nite. And I wil go and join the Palestinian site instead - that will teach you.

08-28-2010, 12:33 AM	#192 (permalink)
Axiom Reality Analyst Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 3,498	Originally Posted by antichrist And Jaydon will have to dissassociate from SCT. Yeah , right ,.... when hell freezes over . __________________ "Sometimes the obligation of the intelligent is to restate the obvious. None more important than emphatically stating that there is a : ' Naked Emperor Elephant in the Room' " Axiom

08-29-2010, 11:13 AM	#193 (permalink)
MOZ Volunteer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Ozchess is the marginalised cyber-spot where cc-Mods choose to engage with cc-banned posters. Posts: 3,541	Originally Posted by MOZ ... No, what you suggest is not logical at all. On this topic, I count chesschat has already 7 posts, and Ozchess has already 24 posts. That is, 31 in total. Now, if you think the newsletter is the appropriate and timely place to have 31 Letters to the Editor, then that would strike me as an unwieldy solution. Well JaK you have not taken the opportunity to argue against my answer to your question Originally Posted by JaK View Post Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the "Interclub chess isn't working" statement? Do you still stand by your suggestion given that we see now there have been 31 responses on the topic on the two chat-boards, and 31 Letters to the Editor would have been an unwieldy solution. I stand by helpful advice I gave CG. The Guru wants to hear from the authoress of the text. The only place she posts is chesschat. Clearly, that is where the engagement is most appropriate. You JaK have not made a case for CG not engaging on chesschat, instead of Ozchess. Have you capitulated? MOZ* __________________ FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

08-29-2010, 11:58 AM	#194 (permalink)
JaK Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 391	Originally Posted by MOZ You JaK have not made a case for CG not engaging on chesschat, instead of Ozchess. Have you capitulated? No way, you have obviously missed my Originally Posted by MOZ Would it be logical to expect ChessGuru to direct his grievances to where he initially spotted the "Interclub chess isn't working" statement? If yes, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao! *If no, thank you very much, the matter is closed for me, I appreciate the hospitality, ciao!* Another subtle point, which you may have also missed, is that despite your desparate efforts none (I repeat NONE) has followed your rather weak (not to say ridiculous) advice -which you still stand for (not even ChessGuru himself)! Why should he anyway? If he wanted to he would have done so (without your advice) in the first place! After all that's where he cut and pasted his material from in the first place! So, no capitulation. You 've lost! that's all, no more!

08-29-2010, 12:08 PM	#195 (permalink)
MOZ Volunteer Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Ozchess is the marginalised cyber-spot where cc-Mods choose to engage with cc-banned posters. Posts: 3,541	Originally Posted by JaK No way, you have obviously missed my Another subtle point, which you may have also missed, is that despite your desparate efforts none (I repeat NONE) has followed your rather weak (not to say ridiculous) advice -which you still stand for (not even ChessGuru himself)! Why should he anyway? If he wanted to he would have done so (without your advice) in the first place! After all that's where he cut and pasted his material from in the first place! So, no capitulation. You 've lost! that's all, no more! Why should he JaK? Because he was probably unaware that Kerry does not post here, and he apparently wanted to engage with the author of the remarks. And no, he did not cut and paste from chesschat. He cut and pasted from the Newsletter. In fact you pointed out on chesschat that he cut-and-pasted from the Newsletter, here. Are you losing track? __________________ FReedom though Fischer-Random chess to enjoy the whole game.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread: