because of two screwed up wannabe-moderators and, one screwed up
ex-wannabe-moderator, who invented nothing but a trice-monthly newsletter about
how many orgasms he gets by playing hide and seek ... (I'll edit that - not promised) ~~*~~

if I would fiddle a bit around in posts as it seems to be custom here ? saved
the board - blur is futile ... purple was pleasantly judging well. Hereby extending
my vote for hastalavista ceremony to any uncompetitive moderator applying ... ~*~

You can believe what you want about which moderator did what, but the truth remains the truth. Let's not clutter this board with this any longer. If you wish to continue it, PM me.

Thad

Purple, I have placed you on hide for your insulting post. If you delete or edit it, I will unhide you.

Thad

warned him, too - the kewl and moderate I am,reliably ...
and, ... as usual it's not me who has to hide something ... I love
to see my points proven ... carry on - don't worry be cappy ... hehehe ~*~

I have him on hide since his first abuse after my warning. ~*~

but danos posts were here for quite a while after bwilds post, theyve only been hidden since you came here

Yes.

did he?

Yes, he did, Stevie. He put danoschek on hide.

he didnt moderate ;o)

I thought you told me you weren't going to moderate for a while.

danoschek,you are becoming insultive.

is that poll closed about keeping gothic at brainking ? not that I'd
want to change my vote completely but maybe refined to keeping
the game, paying him one dollar pa and kick his butt hasta la vista ... ~*~

if that happens to mt st helen
much more people have to suffer. ~*~

Oops!

and its basic piece-value calculation are
in the public domain since the early 90s ... ~*~

I have clearly said that the values were random.

I do not think a Bishop is worth a Knight and a pawn.

Actually the safe check method is not applied to the Pawns. What is really happens in this method is that it predicts/tries to evaluate, the relative values between all the pieces except Pawns.

Let's say for example, that we find with safe check method that:
Knight=0.3 , Bishop=0.4, Queen=1.2
(the values are random)

Then we know from our (actually from GM's) experience that a Knight is worth 3 Pawns. So the previous values are adjusted properly to give:

Pawn= 1
Knight= 3
Bishop = 4
Queen = 12

Wouldn't the "safe check" procedure, if applied to a Pawn, Berolina Pawn, Ferz, Wazir, Man, etc., result in that piece having a value of zero?

quality is already invented, feel free to make use, too. ~*~

Rabbits are counted as birds in japanese.

has anyone patented it yet? nobody move until I see my lawyer

The grammar link even has cats for its examples! How'd you ever find that redsales?

I think the Queen is almost always the best piece on the board. Only a particular position would make me trade away a Queen for a different piece.

encourages to carrying off-topic posts elsewhere (e.g. story board) is perfectly on
topic, as I do believe, actually - ben johnson though merely stay as nice pointer at more folks who were not very selective by what means special privileges are to be acchieved ... ~*~

personally I have found that an Archbishop is especially powerful and in many cases would rather have one than a chancellor or queen. One reason is the solo mate, the other is the incredible defensive features it offers by being able to fork attacking pieces while defending. I think that the human brain finds diagonal routed attacks more difficult to deal with than ranks or files. There are so many examples I can think of in Tal's games where he would set up an apparent rook sacrifice, then sac the bish or N as the opponent was bolstering against the open attack..and this is at the GM level!

One more thing, as public service: the word "it's" is a contraction for "it is", so the cat put it's feet in the water is WRONG, the cat put its feet in the water (possessive) is right. Further unwelcome education may be found at http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

ughaibu,

The following posts were all made here today. None of them seem to make any sense and all seem off topic to me:

"I guess the aunts are knitting cat's tails inumerable."

"Then we've got to worry whose aunt the tails belong to anyway, inheritance is crucial on a dollar a year."

"I shall step on that tail at the story board eventually ... :P ~*~"

I don't think reminding everyone that posts should be on topic and following it up with a second post after someone asked for some clarity qualifies as "unjustified moderating", especially since I haven't censored, edited, banned, and/or hidden any post or person at all. I don't understand what Bagpuss refers to.

Thad

Sure, see tomorrow.

you can't negotiate with two groups of mankind
that is sulking children and terrorists ... good night, and leave me
a few crumbs of him, ugha, I want to eat them on the gameboard ... ~*~

Oh well, Gothic killed another interesting idea with a few trivial whinging and "off topic" posts, par for the course.

you really should not dare speak, eddieboy ... ~*~

I post here because I have opinions to express about the game. Sure I dont play it, see my earlier posts.

but you poor Alpha are proven provocated below
by nasty Omega ... here's a sedativum. Ur welcome ~*~

the only thing that - imho - makes sense on gothicchess.org
is the tiny tiny chapter Mr. Trice wrote about symmetry in gothic chess ...
he's now just running out of feathers on a snake in his redundancy ~*~ 0:)

I have made a formal complaint about your partial and unjustified moderating on the BrainKing board. This isn't the Bagpuss fan club.

I love Gothic's foolishness, digs his own traps and falls in every time.

Sorry, Ed. A couple posts (not yours) didn't make any sense to me. Perhaps others understand them and find them relevant to the rest of the conversation. I was hoping that a reminder to stay on topic would encourage those posters to either quit posting messages that aren't understandable or to make their messages clearer.

Thad

I reckon that we shall have to live with some non-linearities until
each topic board has the backstage gruntler-lodge implemented ... ~*~

All comments by myself have been on topic or in response.
Gothic: how do you get to quote my posts to Walter with me on hide?

I appreciate your few topic posts without
the olympic games and silly statistics ... ~*~

your old notorious misuse of this board for patching personal reality problems ... ~*~

Thad, your post was too vague. Name names. Who was off topic, and what was posted that was off topic? We all know not to make off topic posts, so your post supplied no information.

To all:

Please stay on topic.

Mahalo (Hawaiian thanks),
Thad

Well I am not unhiding them to see what they said, I just suggest everyone hide them and pretend they don't even exist.

Well "ughaibu" and "danoschek" made some "------" comments.

on hide also ... but we got used to it, so merely play
hide and seek, while we take care of gothic - and I was
yet far from my best pointing that you're minorly serious ... ~*~

I have some people on "hide", so I can only assume there are other comments being made. As I have done my best to answer questions seriously, and I have seen some responses which don't make sense, I will leave this discussion for the time being.

Dont be so modest, you have the rudiments of cat chess, go for it.

counts for the chancellor too - could give
an epaulette-mate even without epaulettes
but I guess you mean without foe pieces as well ... ~*~