Well he is knocking on a bit, and was probably all excited about Santas visit, and then open pressies, hes probably knackered LMAO

Spooky, huh? lol

Fencer's trying to take a break so he's passed a few of his moderating duties on to me.

my point was that if there is a group with one name in common ("Golden Heart" , "KM") one fellowship is plenty for them.. maybe if fellowships could create their own internal discussion boards for individual games? though, I honestly don't see that as necesary either, since there are already discussion boards for discussing specific games..
but as I said, your idea is a good compromise in my opinion.

I'm that generous sponsor Harley. :) I'm not sure if this knowledge is useful for this discussion, and it's certainly off-topic. I've also sponsored another pawn, but this one I've known for a few years. The Cherry Bomb membership was only $10.00 USA. It's not about the money though. It's about trust, and being duped. To be honest, I have heard several different versions of the story from different people and don't know what or whom to believe. To be sure, someone is lying to my face, but how to sort out the truth from the lie? This I know: I participated in the adopt-a-pawn for BK's sake and no one else. But I did feel good for being able to give someone else a gift. Now that trust has been broken.

The worse part is that Cherry Bomb (whoever that is) wrote me and told me he knew I was the sponsor and thanked me. The writer of that message knew I had been decieved into paying for this fradulent account and was carrying the deception one step farther. That's pretty cold.

For me this is the most troubling part. As for the money, it's not important. It's the principle of the thing that matters most.

WARNING: If some of the current KM Fellowship BIG BOSSES delete their fellowships, won't the tournaments that are currently being ran in there be deleted? I was thinking they were, but I might be wrong.

Ideas for fellowships - One reason that there are many fellowships is because some people start a fellowship just to have their own private discussion board. (And have no games) - the idea is to let Rooks be able to create their own private discussion board. (Possible have a "Fellowships" section, and a "Private Boards" section.)

well,I dont want to shock ya BBW...but The Cave has evolved to having games!
But yes...it was originally created as a Private discussion board for men.

i think fellowships should be limited to the total amount of fellowships created
(a) if only 10 percent od people created one there would be alot of fellowships out there
(b) limit individuals to maybe two fellowships max

this is just my opinion though ;)

Well I was not talking about the Cave, but there are others that are currently just for the discussion board.

I understand that..I was pointing out the role reversal:)

The new fellowship system will be tightly related to the new discussion board system. The goal is to eliminate all non-games fellowships and turn them to private discussion boards. Of course, this change cannot be done immediately because a new system of monitoring must be developed as well.
However, some specific rules for these private boards will be created, similar to our User Agreement.

There are 5 GH fellowships already. Isn't this following the KM pattern?

There is also an idea to allow each Brain Rook member to create only one fellowship [mainly for game playing - internal tournaments, internal ladder, inter-fellowship team matches] and unlimited number of private discussion boards [not related to that fellowship].
How does it sound to you?

One Brain Rook, one fellowship sounds good to me. I still think one 'group' shouldn't be allowed to dominate the fellowship boards though - ie YZ Ludo (run by Attila the Hun YZ) as one fellowship, followed by YZ Tiddlywinks (run by Ivan the Terrible YZ) etc

I'm not sure what you mean about 'private discussion boards'.

Well, maybe "private" is not the best term. I mean that a special page similar to "Discussion boards" page will be created and any member of Brain Rook or higher level can create new discussion board(s) and set some restrictions for it [for example, to make it readable for everyone but writable for selected users only].
Of course, the board creator will be responsible for the board moderation. Boards with an unacceptable content will be deleted etc.
How would you define a "group" to dominate the fellowships?

"Consequence:

With our hardware being able to detect information about the computer involved in the registration, we can internally monitor duplicate accounts on the same computer.
If more than one family member shares a computer, this is permitted, as long as you do not play games against one another. Violation of this guideline will result in an immediate removal from the site."

well that looks like i will have to leave before i get booted then i cannot avoid playing judd sometimes ;(

Ehm, it is the first version. I should change it a little. Nothing is "definitive" until it is officially announced. There was no official announcement of User Agreement yet.

fencer , i have two fellowhips too one normal and one where i try to teach people how to play games where i can help (all unrated) would i have to get rid of this one in the new version

jason: What is the difference between these two fellowships, the games in the first one are rated and the other games are unrated? Or anything else?

yes... my main fellowship is for the normal stuff (inter fellowship games ect when they start ) . the practice room one is where i try to help some of the lower rated players or players that cannot play certain games to play a better stanard of game

ughaibu: When a board is created as readable for public, its content must be acceptable [no rude words etc.] because this site is visited by children and I don't want to make people think that anybody can post anything to be readable by anyone.
On the other hand, when you create a really private board where only selected users can read/write, you can write anything you want. Until somebody makes a "leak" and reposts some of possible problematic content to any public board.
Please keep in mind that BrainKing is still mostly a site to play games. Discussion boards are only an addition and nobody will be allowed to ruin our good reputation misusing them.

jason: And will it be a big problem to merge these two approaches to one? You can create both rated and unrated tournaments within a fellowship. If there is something else what makes this idea impossible from your point of view, let me know, I am always open to discuss. Maybe, with your suggestions, we will improve the fellowship system to make it better for everyone.

i personally wouldnt want to put them together , i would like to keep them separate , if however that wont be possible i will will delete the practice room one ;(

I still don't see the reason. My understanding of a fellowship is an electronic version of, for example, real chess club. I used to be a member of one chess club 10 years ago. There were very good players who participated in local league team tournaments. There were also beginner players who simply wanted to learn how to play. There were almost all kinds of players and I've seen no problem with coexisting these people in one club. Why couldn't it work in fellowships as well?

ok the main reason for me is that the games in the practice room take alot of time up for me (if people are asking to learn new things i will explain this as much as possible to the player and learn them as much as possible ) which all takes time for me to do (practice room is only a small gathering , combined with my other fellowship i wouldnt be able to do as a good job . it would be easier for me to delete it or give it to someone else to take care of

OK, I have my Friendship fellowship, which is just for my friends on this site to get together, talk and play games. I have the reversi fellowship, my fave game and it covers all Reversi variations and ones to come. These players are essentially fellow reversi players, some I know and are friends, most are just players (no insult meant)
I cant see how I could merge these fellowships :o( But I would have to lose being big boss of reversi by putting it within someone elses.
So in my eyes, we cant just merge them all.
So if GH was removed from the name, its still part of the group but not in name

I'm a member of Jason's practice room and its nice to be among other learners. The atmosphere is less intimidating than it can be in other fellowships. We're all there to learn or to teach.

What about a possibility to have more than one internal discussion board within a fellowship? Then you'll be able to separate these groups by their memberships in teams and they can use only discussion boards of their favourite games.

ty rhiannon . i do like to help people when i can , you said it better than me ;)

That MAY be possible as long as there is a way of only selected members reading each board. (I know you mentioned writing to them)
It would be hard chosing a name for the fellowship that says what is involved etc.
"Steves Friendship inc Reversi temsa/five in line teams"
That would say, you cant join those parts if you not friends.
It could possibly work but would be complicated.
How soon do you feel we need to sort all this by??
Obviously like BBW/S/2004 LOL said, there are tournies involved at the moment, so I guess we should stop making new ones for now

Nobody likes change but I'm sure once its in place it will be quite simple. I have HOME, and also the reptilians which is discussion only about the great animal kingdom. I'd be quite happy to combine them if I can keep the discussions separate. In many ways it will be easier to have everything 'under one roof' so to speak!

In theory easier, but in reality, things are not always the same.
I dont mind change if its for the better :o)
If it will be for the better then I will.

Why does there need to be a group? Why can't all games be played in one fellowship?

To use Golden Heart as an example. Why is there a need for more than one Golden Heart fellowship? Because of what GH stands for, or purports to? Does that make it better than any other fellowship? I'm sure all fellowships profess to have the same standards. I can't see a need for 'GH Checkers', 'GH Chess' etc etc. Sooner or later there'd be a 'GH Central' with someone in overall control. God forbid we reach the situation again whereby the 'leader' sneezes and a dozen underlings spring into action to wipe his/her nose for him (yes, I was going to use another analogy but I thought better of it!). AND hurting a lot of good people along the way - people who DARE to criticise said fellowship or any of it's members. Legalised bullying.

So Golden Heart as one fellowship with one big boss. End of story. Where's the problem?

no problem Bumble, but I have my reversi fellowship just like Rose and Sarok. I dont want it to dissapear. I am enjoying sorting matches with others etc.
So because Rose is in my Friendship fellowship, would she have to dissolve it too if shje joined someone elses fellowship etc?

How about something like:
a 'serious' fellowship (Steve's Reversi, HOME. Jason's Games Room)
PLUS a 'fun' fellowship
(Friendship, Reptilians, Practise Room) etc. per Brain Rook.

These would be separate fellowships.

How does that sound?

Thats what I would prefer Bumble :o)
I am going to join my five in line and Reversi soon but need to wait for tourny finishing ,so will cut down on 1 more :o)

That's just my thoughts, Steve. I don't know what Fencer envisages but I think it would be handy to be allowed two - at least the way the fellowship board is set up at the moment. I'm sure in brainking 2.0 there would be another, better, solution.

eh Bumble, you noticed for a change, a board (this one) is actually working as a solution finder and finding ways forward instead of backwards or stale :o)

I hope so, Steve!

nothing quite like "bumbling" along about something to do with what the board is titled LOL

Heh,heh!

The beauty of it is, Fencer is genuinely interested in all constructive suggestions. Everyone here has an input and will be listened to.

All i hope is that fencer makes some good decisions about the fellowships , im not sure why there is a problem with things as they are (apart from there may be lots of fellowships) but i think no matter how many there are people will most likely still play the same amount of games ect , so im not sure what fencer is actually trying to achieve
edit
this is not an attack on anybody i just would like to understand more

my name is Ustica km MY ID: 460
and Thank You for the rules. :)

the over-abundance of fellowships is one thing(I only have 1)...but what about the self admitted fraud that was performed by chief km?

Well I think there should be a limit on the number of fellowships 1 person can have, but I think 1 would be too limiting. How about a limit of 2? That way for people like Jason who has 2 seperate fellowships can still keep them, and myself I could keep my Gammon fellowship & Battleboat fellowship - which would not make too much sence to merge. (I have 2 others, 1 all game & 1 test - which both could go if needed to get me below the limit.)

So a mix of what we have been saying then. Fencer gets his fellowship limit, we get the limit of 2 (which I think Fencer mentioned too at one point), Fencer gets his multi board system within them, and me, Jason ,and BB? ;o) gets to keep their different types of fellowships seperate :o)
Just like a marriage, this sort of compromise in my eyes would work :o)

Limit of 2 seems to be a good compromise.

So is this going to happen very soon Fencer?

In keeping with Fencer's request,I have deleted this fellowship in favour of Golden Heart Checkers with it's variants. For membership please contact Usurper. :-)