JerNYC: Give us the name and someone will research it if possible.

Bernice: Wow, I was just looking at a wiki page on GT for missing players. Nothing to do with the woman mentioned here, but just in general. It's always a little troubling when someone you've gotten used to on a game site suddenly (and often times, inexplicably) vanishes. I'll never forget about this one guy. I hated him as an opponent but we were such fierce rivals. Many of our games ended in draw. I was always up for the challenge. Then he wrote on his profile that he was embarking on a short vacation. Didn't think anything of it. One month passes. Another month passes. He's timing out in our games. This is odd because he was paid up well in advance. He was such a methodical and regular player. Never showed up again. Four years already. I always had a bad feeling something befell him. I'm glad Barb has such nice friends to think of her and keep others posted. Hope she recovers soon.

rod03801: Yes

Bernice: Is that pbarb2? great GREAT lady. I've wondered what became of her, if it was her. Sweet person.

This message was on Facebook and I know she had a lot of friends on here...

*******
This is Barb Schroeder Peterson daughter Jean. I wasn't sure if everyone saw this post or not, so wanted to put it on Mom's FB page. This is what my sister, Julie had posted earlier today. "My father asked to post this status on here. My family is dealing with a lot right now and prayers are in great need. My mother was at the rehab center for care after her surgery and this morning she had a medical episode and was taken to the hospital. She is in critical care right now and the next 48 hours will tell what will happen next. I am sorry to post like this but it is to difficult to contact each person right now. Please pray for mom." We ask that everyone keeps her in your prayers.
******

Papa Zoom: You might. I know I am tied for the least number of icon changes at zero. I am not sure if I have the longest time without one. :)

I wonder if I hold the record for the most changed profile icons? Maybe there could be an award thingy for that. ;)

rod03801: Bishops can participate in fellowships and post and all that. They can't be big bosses. But they could theoretically be bossy.

KasperNymand: Hmm. That's interesting. Of course I've been a rook for over 10 years lol. And I do always see bishops IN fellowships. (But that is possibly because they were already in there when they had a higher membership, and may not be able to actually participate) Someone else may have to confirm if I have given you incorrect information. If so, I apologize.

Have you tried actually joining? (Instead of just viewing)

rod03801: Then I think this sentence should be corrected: "You cannot join the fellowship because this feature is available for Brain Knight or higher membership level."
It's shown when you view a Fellowship, without being a paying member.

The Col: I just wrote to him on your behalf, and mentioned it in Glob fellowship. We will see.

rod03801: And got this message :

Changes have been stored in the database and are waiting to be approved by an administrator.

KasperNymand: Yes

Are you able to join Fellowships with a Brain Bishop membership?

happyjuggler0: Danica McKellar > Danica Patrick

happyjuggler0: Which court would that be in?

I voted in a BrainKing poll, as I often do when they are available.

This poll was about Nascar, which I know virtually nothing about. Which means I probably (certainly?) should have voted for "Don't watch NASCAR". But I didn't. Instead I checked out the odds on some website that google gave me, and found out that Danica Patrick was only 40-1 against, and so I voted for her.

The missing subtext is that lots of people simple HATE her, despite her being a solid racer at worst. So I chose to be "that guy" who voted for her.

Sue me if you don't like it.

*edit: punctuation

Aganju: Actually, I find it more likely that more features and functionalities will be removed.

Did you all see? BrainKing is getting an upgrade! New games? New features? New operating system patch?
I am afraid it is the latter only...

Carpe Diem: Quite a coincidence, I just came up against this very situation, and made a different move than I would have previously. But I forgot to follow my own advice and tell my opponent why I moved the piece I did. :(

cd power:It's alright I am sure I will enjoy it again.

Resher: This game was talked about in the Untouchables fellowship... I found it in the fellowship thread. That's how I know what happened.

Everyone interprets rules differently, that's why I asked for clarification in my original post. Also, per Aganju's request, further discussion should take place on the backgammon board: http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=26

LOL Crosseyed... sorry to ruin it for you!

Resher:

(1) I don't know. You may have discussed the game in a fellowship.
(2) The rule says that if (a) opponent has collected all his checkers onto the one point behind player's prime, then (b) the player must unblock a point in his prime to allow the opponent a chance to move.

The situation described as (a) did not occur in your game, hence (b) did not (or would not) have to be enforced.

Pedro Martínez:
(1) How would cd power know I'd pointed out the rule to Zach then?  I was guessing he had special status, rather than everyone could see the comments.
(2) Why do you think that?  Apart from one stone on my 1-point (which can't move) all other stones are behind a six prime, so can't move either.  Please explain how you interpret the rule.

Resher:

(1) We cannot see your in-game comments.
(2) The rule being discussed does not apply to the situation in question (Move 25) in your game with Zach.

Marshmud: I used to really enjoy playing Fegva now I don't think I will enjoy it so much now.

cd power: Thanks for finding this game - it's exactly the one I've been trying to find.  Zach was very good about this game.  He was about to win by just one roll, but because he had delayed unblocking by one roll earlier on, he offered a draw.  So this shows it can affect the outcome - it doesn't just apply to hopelessly lost cases that don't matter.

(I didn't realise that you could read all our in-game comments - is that some special privilege you have?)

cd power: Actually, we should take this whole thread to the Backgammon Board; it is really not of 'common interest' to all BrainKing (-> http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=26)

Aganju: Here is another example (which I researched from a fellowship game) -- Resher pointed out the rule to Zach, and Zach later offered a draw in good sportsmanship because he didn't open up the spot on time. Click on move 25: Fevga (Zach vs. Resher)

cd power: you are right, it applies at move 27 (http://brainking.com/en/ShowGame?g=6542931&i=53). at move 25, White could still move 2 -> 1(which it did). Black correctly followed the rule and opened, right when required (but maybe accidentally?).

Aganju: Actually, if you click back on move 25, he was blocking 8-9-10 also, so yes, the rule applies here

Marshmud: If you would be blocking 10, 9, 8 in addition, then he had no move whatever he rolls, and you would be required to open anyone of 10,9,8,7,6,5.

likewowman2cool: I"m not sure I knew of this rule. I think I probably exploited that glitch a few times.

Marshmud: No, it is not an example of the rule.

The rule is that if on all rolls it is impossible for your opponent to move, then you must open up a space that he or she can move into.

cd power: Is this a example of the rule? So by the rule I need to open my prime since all the other pieces are in my home area?

Fevga (Elly1962 vs. Marshmud)

Roberto Silva: You are correct. Thus, I will take Pedro's advice from the other day and not take the rules too seriously! Thanks everyone for their input... I can close this case now :)

cd power: on the subject of perpetual check, with the exception of stalemate, no other draw rules are enforced by the server.

cd power: I only play the easy games.

crosseyed: I'm sure there are other rules on this site that are not enforced. For example, in chess, perpetual check is allowed and can force a draw that way. In Chinese Chess, perpetual check is not allowed and the person doing the check must break it off... hence, no forced draw. However, even though that is a published rule for chinese chess, it is not enforced on this site.

Aganju: I am getting really confused now. I guess I should have read the rules.

crosseyed: There is another rule that says you cannot prime (completely block) your own starting board, meaning blocking spots 1 to 6 right in the quarter where you start. You can prime any other place on the board. This rule is actually enforced, even if you wanted only to move through the spot (which is incorrect I think), like when you have a double and you want to move through the sixth spot, temporarily blocking the section, and then move on.

Marshmud: I was not aware that blocking a long line of pieces was against the rules. It has happened to me many times and I am sure I have done the same to other players a few times. However there have been times when it would not let me place a piece where I have wanted to because it would mean blocking the other player. When I have been blocked and there is no way I could win I resign the game as I don't see any point in holding up a tournament. As we all know some tournaments can take years to be completed.

cd power: I also had no knowledge of this rule. I think it's great that you proactively follow it - I'd suggest that when you do, you let your opponent know. Something like:

cd power: I agree with you but I'm not sure you will get that clarification you ask for. If the game site can't implement the rules properly I'm not sure how you expect the members to play accordingly.

Marshmud: For me, it is an issue of honest sportsmanship. If a published rule is pointed out, it should be followed.

cd power: By forcing your opponent to open up that spot after all his men is in his final section how do you expect to win anyway? I realize its mathematically possible.

I'm not trying to be rude just trying to understand the rule. If I was asked (and I never have) I would immediately open up a spot in my prime. I think 90% of the fevga players are unaware of this rule.

Aganju: Yes, my opponent thinks the rule is "unfair" and chose not to follow it after I pointed it out. It is a rare situation to have all checkers stacked on one point, and that is why most people are not aware of this rule. This is the first time I was the one with all checkers on one point, but it has happened several times where my opponents have stacked all of theirs, and I freed up a spot for them to have a chance to move. I believe you should always follow the rules at a game site if they are published... even if they are not your standard way of playing. Oh well.

cd power: no clue about this rule...think my opponents either...

Marshmud: me either I had to go and read the rules