Single Comment

Every so often, we get discussions about what should, or more accurately,
should not be allowed on these pages. As the person primarily responsible
for what got posted and what got censored for the past 2-3 years, I am the
one to whom you should direct your complaints [or compliments, although I
know better ;-)] about what shows up here.

My policies are few and simple. I push politeness and abstract strategy
games. I oppose censorship. Simple ideals to state. Implementation is a bit
more difficult; reality is far messier than the printed page. In practice,
this means I will post anything that approaches chess and is written to a
minimum standard. I will also delete comments that I feel have overstepped
the boundaries of this site. This is a 'G' rated site - one for general
audiences, including children. A certain level of civility needs to be
maintained. To this end, I ask that all comments address the post and not
the poster. Don't get personal. It only detracts from what you may be
trying to say, and it will provoke a response if not curtailed. 

Having discussed censoring people's comments, let's move to censoring a
page, whether a game, piece, or information page. It has been suggested
that an editor might be more discriminating in choosing what to post or
reject. The great bulk of what I've rejected has been poorly-written game
pages. Consider some of what's made it onto the site; now imagine how bad
something has to be to get rejected. People, you can do better. Rarely, I
get an exact duplicate of a game I know is already posted. These people are
always disappointed that their great idea is already online. I do, however,
require something new and legible. Understandable - sometimes that's a
judgment call. Worthwhile - that's always a judgment call.

So why don't I make those calls? On what basis should I make them?
There's either personal taste or some general principles. Personal taste?
I started by designing 4D variants, then ran shatranj all the way out to
'Next Chess'. Recently I started a free-for-all with a game that uses
leadership rules to structure multimove variants. Based on my designs, I'm
prejudiced against boards smaller than 10x10, pieces that don't capture by
replacement, en passant, castling, and any piece that moves more than 4
squares. You sure you want my tastes? That leaves general principles. 

What principles do I adopt that exclude games, pieces, or information
pages? The same problems as above apply, although we reach them by a
somewhat different direction. How do I exclude people? Well, to be fair,
what's the purpose of the site? To celebrate chess and chess variants, and
make them available to everyone. To me, this means the site is 'G' rated,
and anything that approaches chess and is coherently put together should be
made available. It's not like we don't have the room. I encourage
creativity. Who knows what a person's next game will be like?

'So why don't I make those calls?' I do. You may not agree with the
results. I encourage you to comment, civilly, on any page you like or
dislike. That's why we have a rating system. People can learn from good
feedback. People can't learn anything if the idea never sees the light of
day. No one person can speak for everyone, I believe in allowing people to
speak [politely] for themselves.