Check out Grant Acedrex, our featured variant for April, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
George Duke wrote on Sun, Sep 16, 2007 07:23 PM UTC:
One of 400 CVs Rated, Latrunculi gets Poor simply because the full piece mix was used before, without even acknowlegement, in Logical Follow-up to Duke of Rutland's: (RFerz),N,(BWazir),Q,K,P. Period. There are no 6-point criteria. That's silly. There are not even so few as 16 or 36 factors on checklist in rating. Are there 100 factors? More like several hundred. Below 1/2 the LargeCVs, anyone can read Comments mostly 2003-2005 by 'GWD' evaluating in long-term survey. The deliberative criteria from value-statements already made about 300 Large and 100 other CVs are variously ad hoc, heuristic, eclectic. We reach into our toolbag on a case basis to show an honest appraisal. Piece-type density, piece density, power density, originality, complete Rules, extent of Drawishness, supporting problem themes, cultural resonances, no channelled openings, value-added. These Comments are conscientiously to reject JJoyce's doctrine of re-inventing the wheel -- directly related to likes of Latrunculi. Joyce has said for year that it is not so important whether a deviser recreates a form used before. To contrary, we think it is incumbent to make every effort to find all relevant prior art and meanwhile postpone publishing. Our position is supported by Fergus Duniho's 'Marshall' article, then directed at overuse of (RN) and (BN) without knowledge of prior uses. Altogether thus our opinion that bad precedent and example, for newcomers especially, this Latrunculi. That's all, not so big a deal. It does not criticize GGifford's adequate Chess work elsewhere, nor do we particularly reach out for agreement from the majority here(extreme minority elsewhere) propounding 'proliferation' as their ideal.

Edit Form

Comment on the page Latrunculi duo milia et septum

Conduct Guidelines
This is a Chess variants website, not a general forum.
Please limit your comments to Chess variants or the operation of this site.
Keep this website a safe space for Chess variant hobbyists of all stripes.
Because we want people to feel comfortable here no matter what their political or religious beliefs might be, we ask you to avoid discussing politics, religion, or other controversial subjects here. No matter how passionately you feel about any of these subjects, just take it someplace else.
Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.