nabla: Yes, that's probably the best rule.

As far as I'm concerned the interface issue is secondary. It should be very easy to create the necessary additional piece images (e.g. take the current images and add a little red dot or something). And even without the extra images, all the information would still be there in the game history; players would just have to be careful to pay attention in certain situations.

But the most important thing is to get the rules right. Now that we know what the correct rule is, the BK implementation should be corrected as soon as possible.

nabla: I agree completely that the choice is between the original rules and Robert Huber's revision. It would be inappropriate for us here at BrainKing to patch together a hastily concocted hodgepodge of fiddly litte rules and try to pass the result off as Mr. Huber's work. That sort of thing would only lead to confusion and the tarnishing of an interesting variant.

I support adopting the revised rules. I have not yet played Recycle Chess, partly because I just haven't got around to it, but also because the original rule (where a pawn's reward for bravely crossing the board is cruel annihilation) is simply ugly.

Of course it would have to be made clear whether a promoted pawn, upon being recycled, retains its promoted status (as in BK's Loop Chess) or reverts to pawnhood (as in Bughouse and Crazyhouse).