[ List Latest Comments Only For Pages | Games | Rated Pages | Rated Games | Subjects of Discussion ]
Comments/Ratings for a Single Item
I have not read recent exchanges in some threads that prompt this new topic, but noticed a few words. However, generally, what Joyce raises here, inconvenient ad hominem poor choice of words, in the nature of attack, is not nearly so offensive as the following. (1) Rudeness involving preoccupation with one's own portfolio to the near-exclusion of the other 3000 CVs on this page, and 2000 CVs in Pritchard 'ECV', and other sources (2) Refusal to refrain from publishing, article or Rules-set or Preset, when it is found there is considerable similarity to pre-existing work (3) Assumption that we all adhere to ''prolificism,'' to tolerate that failure just to acknowledge prior art someone's own closely duplicates, even when it is clearly called to attention. So, discourtesy comes in many forms, and greater indiscretions are substantive.
On this note, may I suggest that maybe some common terminology and so on be agreed to? Stuff like Braves Chess be quantified as a universal game fix, rather than a separate game and so on? I do agree that people need to watch what they are saying. If someone thinks something is flawed, please explain WHY so that a better creation can come about?
The purpose of this website, as I see it, is to provide a broad forum for chess and chess-like games, open to all people, offering a place for the free exchange of ideas. To encourage the free exchange of ideas and to make the site welcoming to as many people as possible, certain minimum standards of behavior should be maintained. 'Hitting', or attacking another person directly, thinly disguised, by obvious implication, or otherwise, is not appropriate behavior for this site. As I have been asked to more directly indicate what might be 'over the line', I will do so. The obvious forms of name-calling and such I need not detail, I hope. Value judgments, indicated by words like 'flawed', 'nonsense', 'ridiculous', 'piecemeal', are also part of this, when applied in such a way as to belittle a person. Feel free to call each other names elsewhere. Here, please stick to chess. There is a difference in tone and attitude between: 'Your whole philosophy is utter rubbish. My work is much better.' and 'I believe you are mistaken here, and this is correct instead. My reasons are: A... B... C... How would you refute this?' I hate lecturing. I didn't like it as a boss at work, and I don't like it now. Politeness and respect should be the basis of our dealings with each other on this site. The Golden Rule is a good guide here. Please use it. I don't expect perfection. I do expect decent behavior, as do the others who use, or wish to use, this site. Now, let us all lighten up and value peace in our discussions.
4 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.