Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old June 19th 07, 10:29 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 21
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

Richard a écrit :
On Jun 19, 12:29 pm, CeeBee wrote:
On 19 jun 2007 Ron wrote in rec.games.chess.analysis:

CHeck out the archives.

I don't have to check out the archives, I was there when those archives
you refer to were filled. It's not very special to the Usenet chess groups
- it's basically the same everywhe the signal to noise ratio on Usenet
is traditionally low. It was then, it is now.

--
CeeBee

No, Ron's right on this. The signal to noise ratio on this group
really wasn't that bad in the past. I just checked the Google archives
of rgc.analysis he

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.g...is/about?hl=en

My own first posts to this newsgroup were in 2000, so that's the year
I'll use as an example. During that year, the total number of posts to
this group were between 507 and 1026 per month, with at least 892 in
half of the months of that year. So far in 2007, this group has gotten
between 129 and 429 posts per month, with most (4 of 6) months being
in the 200's.

Now click any random month from 2000 to see what the posts were about.
Click June, 2000 to compare to the current month, and the first post
that shows up is about USCF elections, which is spam for rgc.analysis,
since it should be on rgc.politics. But looking at the titles of the
first 25 posts listed, that and one other message about faster
internet service are the only obvious spam. Skimming some of the
ambiguous thread titles to see if they're spam, I see 3 or 4 others
that were about chess, but should have been in rgc.misc instead of
rgc.analysis (and were probably cross-posted to both).

So in June 2000, we had 4 times as many posts to this newsgroup as in
June 2007 so far (or even May 2007 if you want to compare to a full
month), and 75% of them were on topic. Look at this group now, and
you've got posts about USCF elections, Sam Sloan, Hal Bogner (I don't
know or care who that is), off topic cross posts about professional
chess player salaries, Winboard, and ... The Beatles???

So there are now more total spam posts, despite having only 25% as
many total posts. I'd call that a decline in the signal to noise
ratio.

--Richard

I am probably one of the oldest reader of r.g.c, even before it was
splitted in many different newsgroup (I even was the "author" of the
first poll in the r.g.c newsgroup to create a r.g.c.c group, poll which
was rejected at the time (~1992)).
In those days, people were polite, there was no spam, and no robot to
grab your addresse.
Robert Hyatt or the regretted Michael Valvo were active participant, and
Feng Hsiung Hsu or Johnathan Schaeffer were there also. There were
interesting duscussions about Artificial Intelligence, analysis of great
games, and so on.

Yesterday....

Now I am just reading it from time to time, with a little bit of nostalgy...
  #2   Report Post  
Old June 19th 07, 11:31 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jan 2006
Posts: 470
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

On Jun 19, 2:29 pm, James wrote:
Richard a écrit :



On Jun 19, 12:29 pm, CeeBee wrote:
On 19 jun 2007 Ron wrote in rec.games.chess.analysis:


CHeck out the archives.
I don't have to check out the archives, I was there when those archives
you refer to were filled. It's not very special to the Usenet chess groups
- it's basically the same everywhe the signal to noise ratio on Usenet
is traditionally low. It was then, it is now.


--
CeeBee


No, Ron's right on this. The signal to noise ratio on this group
really wasn't that bad in the past. I just checked the Google archives
of rgc.analysis he


http://groups.google.com/group/rec.g...is/about?hl=en


My own first posts to this newsgroup were in 2000, so that's the year
I'll use as an example. During that year, the total number of posts to
this group were between 507 and 1026 per month, with at least 892 in
half of the months of that year. So far in 2007, this group has gotten
between 129 and 429 posts per month, with most (4 of 6) months being
in the 200's.


Now click any random month from 2000 to see what the posts were about.
Click June, 2000 to compare to the current month, and the first post
that shows up is about USCF elections, which is spam for rgc.analysis,
since it should be on rgc.politics. But looking at the titles of the
first 25 posts listed, that and one other message about faster
internet service are the only obvious spam. Skimming some of the
ambiguous thread titles to see if they're spam, I see 3 or 4 others
that were about chess, but should have been in rgc.misc instead of
rgc.analysis (and were probably cross-posted to both).


So in June 2000, we had 4 times as many posts to this newsgroup as in
June 2007 so far (or even May 2007 if you want to compare to a full
month), and 75% of them were on topic. Look at this group now, and
you've got posts about USCF elections, Sam Sloan, Hal Bogner (I don't
know or care who that is), off topic cross posts about professional
chess player salaries, Winboard, and ... The Beatles???


So there are now more total spam posts, despite having only 25% as
many total posts. I'd call that a decline in the signal to noise
ratio.


--Richard


I am probably one of the oldest reader of r.g.c, even before it was
splitted in many different newsgroup (I even was the "author" of the
first poll in the r.g.c newsgroup to create a r.g.c.c group, poll which
was rejected at the time (~1992)).
In those days, people were polite, there was no spam, and no robot to
grab your addresse.
Robert Hyatt or the regretted Michael Valvo were active participant, and
Feng Hsiung Hsu or Johnathan Schaeffer were there also. There were
interesting duscussions about Artificial Intelligence, analysis of great
games, and so on.

Yesterday....

Now I am just reading it from time to time, with a little bit of nostalgy....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Your best bet is now www.talkchess.com. That's where Dr. Hyatt and
several other engine writers hang out, plus lots of very knowledgeable
people and fans.

jm

  #3   Report Post  
Old June 20th 07, 06:02 AM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
Ron Ron is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 475
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

In article .com,
wrote:

Your best bet is now
www.talkchess.com. That's where Dr. Hyatt and
several other engine writers hang out, plus lots of very knowledgeable
people and fans.


Talkchess.com seems really focused on stuff that's primarily appropriate
for r.g.c.computer.

Nothing wrong with that. It's where I'd go for that sort of discussion.

Chessforums.org seems like a better place for .misc and .analysis type
discussions, although in my opinion it still clearly needs more people.
(It seems to be growing, and to have as many - if not more - B to expert
level players as we do, but, again, it's still a long way from where
these newsgroups used to be.)

-Ron
  #4   Report Post  
Old June 22nd 07, 08:58 AM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2007
Posts: 4
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

Hi everyone,

Thanks for your comments regarding www.ChessForums.org, its good to
see that people are supporting the site.

I started the site back in February, so its come a long way since
then, we are now up to 433 members, which I believe has been a really
great start. With starting a new forum its been a bit if a catch22
situation, you can't tempt the more experienced players to join
without having some experienced players on the forums. But I'm pleased
to say the site is going from strength to strength, and we have a
really good community developing. I set out to create a modern chess
forum, as there seemed to be a gap for this, modern in terms of its
software (vBulletin 3.6.7) and in terms of its design and usability.

I hope you get chance to check the site out, and if you like what you
see/read please register and help us develop the forums further.
I would also like to add that www.ChessForums.org has been setup by
myself, this isn't a company who also sell chess sets or a large
internet company, its just me and the admin team.

Thanks,
Greg

  #5   Report Post  
Old June 25th 07, 09:03 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 3
Default So where to discuss chess these days?


Hi everyone,

Thanks for your comments regarding www.ChessForums.org, its good to
see that people are supporting the site.

Yes it's a very nice forum! It has many different and interesting
topics.
But unfortunately there is a moderator there called Phobetor where
closes threads when he doesn't want
opinions different from his own to appear. That's why i had to leave :-
(

He did it just once, but that was enough. He says in his profile that
he is 18 years old so i understand his behavior. Teens don't like to
be proven wrong. :-)



  #7   Report Post  
Old June 26th 07, 07:31 AM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 7
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

On Jun 25, 9:50 pm, Ron wrote:
In article . com,

wrote:
But unfortunately there is a moderator there called Phobetor where
closes threads when he doesn't want
opinions different from his own to appear. That's why i had to leave :-
(


He did it just once, but that was enough. He says in his profile that
he is 18 years old so i understand his behavior. Teens don't like to
be proven wrong. :-)


Yeah. I sent him a gentle email saying that I'd seen it be a problem in
the past when a moderator had been a little to vociferous about his own
opinions, and felt the need to get a last word in (which Phobetor
clearly does). He was a little dismissive but hopefully he'll get the
hint.

-Ron


Hi Ron,

Please accept my apologies for your experience with Phobetor, I'm sure
he didn't mean to come across dismissive, I have previously warned him
about thinking more about the way his posts can be read : )

I hope this hasn't put you off continuing to be an active member on
the forums,
Thanks, Greg

  #8   Report Post  
Old June 26th 07, 05:58 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
Ron Ron is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 475
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

In article om,
Greg wrote:

Please accept my apologies for your experience with Phobetor, I'm sure
he didn't mean to come across dismissive, I have previously warned him
about thinking more about the way his posts can be read : )

I hope this hasn't put you off continuing to be an active member on
the forums,


It's fine. I haven't - directly - had any problems with him. I just,
very quickly, saw the potential problem. Being the most active poster
and the moderator on a bulletin board is like playing the game while
being the referee - it's easy for their to be an appearance of a lack of
impartiality (whether or not there actually is any) which can generate
ill-will.

I'm optimistic that he'll learn, and in subsequent emails it appears
that he's starting to figure that out. We'll have to wait and see.

-Ron
  #9   Report Post  
Old June 26th 07, 07:59 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 7
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

On Jun 26, 5:58 pm, Ron wrote:
In article om,

Greg wrote:
Please accept my apologies for your experience with Phobetor, I'm sure
he didn't mean to come across dismissive, I have previously warned him
about thinking more about the way his posts can be read : )


I hope this hasn't put you off continuing to be an active member on
the forums,


It's fine. I haven't - directly - had any problems with him. I just,
very quickly, saw the potential problem. Being the most active poster
and the moderator on a bulletin board is like playing the game while
being the referee - it's easy for their to be an appearance of a lack of
impartiality (whether or not there actually is any) which can generate
ill-will.

I'm optimistic that he'll learn, and in subsequent emails it appears
that he's starting to figure that out. We'll have to wait and see.

-Ron


Thanks Ron,

I appreciate your experience and input on this matter,

Regards,
Greg

  #10   Report Post  
Old July 5th 07, 04:47 AM posted to rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2007
Posts: 2
Default So where to discuss chess these days?

On Jun 19, 7:31 pm, wrote:
Your best bet is nowwww.talkchess.com. That's where Dr. Hyatt and
several other engine writers hang out, plus lots of very knowledgeable
people and fans.

The problem with www.talkchess.com is the short life span of posts.
They are deleted after 6 months. So a lot of interesting and valuable
information is lost. The big advantage of rec.games.chess.computer is
that posts stay forever.
Mark Schreiber

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 February 19th 06 05:44 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 January 19th 06 06:15 AM
rec.games.chess.misc FAQ [2/4] [email protected] rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 November 3rd 05 05:30 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:54 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017