Single Comment

George, I find myself in substantial agreement with much of what you say,
though far from all of it. One of our recent prolific posters has
suggested a better breakdown of categories in which this site accepts
submissions. You are saying substantially the same here in your point 2,
if I include a footnote-type or me-too category that some posts would be
relegated to? I might buy that but not all will agree. But we will all
likely offer different categories. So that discussion might well better be
carried on elsewhere, say in the categories discussion.

On your point 3, where I leaned a bit against your viewpoint, I've
changed my mind somewhat, and I lean a bit toward your viewpoint. So I
will, for example, acknowledge ERB in Lemurian as someone 'modern' who
did a unique game with shortrange pieces.

On point 1, I find myself in substantial disagreement. The site has
created a wiki, open to all, which is doing, or trying to do, some
fascinating things. It has, currently running, 2 tournaments, structured
to provide a quite diversified  portfolio of games. There has been an
influx of new people, many bringing their own games, which has prompted
impromptu Invent and Play arrangements. Yes, the new people, myself among
them, don't know the rich history, and this is a lack. This is why I have
changed my mind about mentioning similar items in write-ups. I assume here
that having them mentioned in the comments wouldn't count.

Realistically, though, few are going to make a serious attempt to read all
that went before, or even a major chunk of it, and fewer still will
remember all they've read. So it's pretty much up to those who remember
it as it happened or played it or made it back when to apprise the rest of
us of such facts as they know, if the record is to be kept straight, I
would imagine. 

Joe