Louis Blair wrote:
I wrote (31 Jan 2006 15:53:51 -0800):
The possibility that I was raising (for discussion)
was that (for purposes of television) European
chess be played in an atmosphere like that of
a Chinese Chess game.

Nick wrote (1 Feb 2006 17:39:25 -0800):

In my view, Louis Blair's choice of term,
'European chess', is unfortunate.

1) Was 'European chess' invented by Europeans?

Chess (or 'European chess' as Louis Blair
prefers to call it) was invented in Asia.

In a discussion where reference is made to both
European and Chinese chess,

As far as I know, *only Louis Blair* has been
using the term 'European chess' in this thread.

it strikes me as inappropriate for anyone to take
these as references to the invention of chess.

My implied comment about the *non-European
origins of chess* was intended to help point out
the inappropriate nature of Louis Blair's preferred
term 'European chess'.

I regard Louis Blair's term, 'European chess',
as *inappropriate*. It's ethnocentric at best,
and it may be perceived as having somewhat
racist connotations.

I have experienced overt racism in chess clubs.
I doubt that Louis Blair has had comparable
experiences.

Nick wrote (1 Feb 2006 17:39:25 -0800):

2) Are only Europeans the top players
in 'European chess'?

No, for example, Anand is not a European.

It strikes me as inappropriate for anyone
to take these "term"s as references to
the exclusive location of top players.

Again, what I wrote was intended to help point
out the inappropriate nature of Louis Blair's
preferred term 'European chess'.

By the way, four FIDE World Champions
(Petrosian, Kasparov, Anand, Kasimdzhanov)
were born in Asia. (Armenia, Azeribaijan,
and Georgia are in Asia).

Nick wrote (1 Feb 2006 17:39:25 -0800):

3) Is there an International Federation
of 'European Chess'?

It strikes me as inappropriate for anyone
to take these "term"s as references to
any "Federation".

Again, what I wrote was intended to help point
out the inappropriate nature of Louis Blair's
preferred term 'European chess', particularly
in contrast to, simply, the term 'chess'.

Nick wrote (1 Feb 2006 17:39:25 -0800):

My suggestion is that we refer to 'European
chess' simply as 'chess'. I doubt that any
reader in rec.games.chess.* will be confused
by that term.

This newsgroup is not rec.games.European_chess.*

If it is a discussion where several versions of
the game are being considered, it seems to
me that such confusion is possible.

Again, my point is that it's inappropriate (being
ethnocentric and perhaps even somewhat racist) for
Louis Blair to refer to 'chess' as 'European chess'.

Nick wrote (1 Feb 2006 17:39:25 -0800):
We should also refer to 'Chinese chess' as
'xiangqi' and to 'Japanese chess' as 'shogi'.
If necessary to insure clarity, we may write
of "xiangqi ('Chinese chess')" or of "shogi
('Japanese chess')".

I will consider these suggestions, but I do
not see Nick as having any authority to
decree how I "should" write.

I made a polite suggestion to Louis Blair, who
has decided to construe it as an attempt to
"decree how (he) 'should' write".

Louis Blair has the right to write however he
pleases. And other writers have the right to
criticise whatever Louis Blair writes.

In this case, I am noting that Louis Blair
apparently insists on using his preferred term,
'European chess', when some players would
perceive it as ethnocentric and inappropriate.

--Nick