I think it is a great idea to have a few "subject related links" posted above the books board.
I think it would be a good suggestion for each board to have such a related links list.
-------
I think a board for "art & culture" would be a good suggestion.I could consider co-moderating.but I think before I speak,it would be wise to read what it means to be a moderator.
------
considering current events world wide.
maybe a board for "enviroment & world watch issues" might be of interest.
but I would hope it wouldnt to too contraversal.and if it became so,could people debate & even agree to disagree without it decaying into a rant war?

nobleheart: IMO, There is no way you could have a public environment mor world watch board without using the word 'debate' in the description!

There are plenty of the types of topics you suggest being discussed and debated currently in the form of fwellowships. Just another good reason to upgrade your membership :)

Right, BK Freedom of Speech, reserved for the elite :P

nobleheart: This idea for a 'World Events' board has been both suggested and declined in the past.

Btw, you can't be a Co-Mod unless you pay for it.

I happen to think it'd be a good feature, so long as it was run fairly (no 'tiny tyrannies' for Mod regime). If such a board were created, the possibility for 'rants' would always be there, because most people can't hold a real debate without slinging mud in the other guy's face.
However, this also might draw in more potential customers into BK, a'cuz 'Everybody loves to watch the fights'

But.. it's up to Fencer, idinnit? :P

gekrompen hoofd:
(no 'tiny tyrannies' for Mod regime

which blamed me to be "racial slur" and did not cancel an apperently affront sicne about 12 hours (see a posting from 10. Juli 2005, 20:41:08 here)

chessmec: They tend to hold personal vendettas as well. There are still certain boards that I'm banned from simply because I spoke out against their disorderly conduct.

On the Main Page game list, each game has a reference to how much time there is left. But there is no distinction between time left for the move or time left for the game. The later definitelly need some special attention and shouldn't be mingled between the rest of the games (and only come to the top of the list when their time is running out).

Can this information please be added? Some suggestions:

• New column with indication of "type of time left" (game or move). This would allow to sort by this property
  
• On games running on Fischer Clock, add a red dot next to the time left with the legend on top (game time left)
  
• Separate this type of games into another table
  

I personally prefer the second and hate the third (but I always add even the ideas I hate - it may trigger some good ones as well).

pauloaguia: Game time left can only be determined for games with a Fisher clock, and a 0.0 increment/move, can't it? Since a lot of players will not play any such games, using another column takes, IMO, too much screen estate for its return. OTOH, if Fencer also added another configuration parameter, which indicates which columns you see on your running games lists (for instance, I personally don't care to see the name of the tournament - and with it gone I can see more games without scrolling as many tournament names are long enough to cause wrapping).

AbigailII: aggreed that the time displayed isn't necessarilly the total game time left.
But as it is now, a value is still displayed, and it's the value that is valid at each moment.

Anyway, my point was to have an indication that allowed us to distinguish between the two type os time control. How it is done and it's full implications I'll leave it to Fencer ;)

I reckon it was no affront. Unlike my pleasant call for clarifying the vacancy function
which was hastily deleted on mem-only by one prospecting personal gain just in blur.
PM's (last visible) flatulence here may be the encyphered request for czech holidays. ~*~

Could someone please define what is a vacancy function? A vacancy in a hotel is an available room. Is this an available game?

Eriisa: i think he means 'vacation'

danoschek:
1. Paying for a membership doesn't buy the right that your suggestions be automatically implemented, or even considered, as you may have already noticed...
2. Paying for a membership certainly does not buy you the right to rant and rave when your voice is lost in the desert...
3. Paying for a membership DOES give you the capability to hide other people's opinions, although you might find yourself very much by yourself in most DBs :)

WhiteTower: Very well said. I should add it to FAQ.

Fencer: It was slightly aimed at you as well :> but you're the boss here, so...

I used to write policies for IRC networks, so it's quite easy to put such things in words, and with users like dano around, it's very easy to find material ;)

WhiteTower: What does the paid membership have to do with me?

Fencer: It was the suggestion that others might think of... that their paid membership could EVER buy numbers 1 and 2... Your reply, I assume, means it's not to happen :) As opposed to other sites that bend over backwards, making one not even want to consider a free membership there...

Czuch Chuckers: debate is fine if done intelligently,as I am sure you would agree.it can be stimulating & opens the mind uop to opposing viewpoints.
but I would hope it would not degenerate into name calling & childishness.
some people cant deal with someone not agreeing with them.

I was curious as to why you left me alone on some of my comment in the civilization fellowship.... I finally realized that you are now a pawn :)

nobleheart: I wholeheartedly agree, but I think the more appropriate place in in a private fellowship... it can be too much for small children without parental guidence.

Czuch Chuckers: Debating is bad for children now? Heaven forbid they learn to develop an opinion or two early in life.

not commented yet. e.g. after I faced certain noriousness on let's say, two boards, try to avoid trouble and hide, but shortly later *heckle heckle* on the next board you know.
my suggested global board-hide option would be good not only for serious players then. ~*~

grenv: If children learn to debate, then they will learn to think for themselves. If that happens, all hell will break loose.

Rex Nihilo: Watch out, you may have to say "all heck will break loose" on this board. People have been banned for less.

grenv: My humble and sincere apologies to those offended.

And your feature request is...?

Pedro Martínez: I was putting my support, in a round about way, for free and open debating. I know this is considered radical and dangerous to some though.

Can we get back to serious feature requests please? Grenv, there is a f/s for debating if you should choose to join it.

should be limited to 90 mins per day - I demand that the focus is on serious players,
not on the spampest that needs twilight for their heinous ways. mods should not be
allowed to cloak altogether. we want to see to which cosanostra the fiddlefreaks belong ... ~*~

You can't win in an autocratic society

yeah right - not on the very own channels of the stalinistic nomenclatura after all.
supporting posts get deleted hastily, while the bully-flatulence stays wondrously long
until they look goofed and ugly as they are under comeback of my verbal superpower. ~*~

Rex Nihilo: I agree,if kids were exposed to more than gansterism,rap music,pot & video games..they might actually start having a few neurons firing.

I opened brainking.com Main-Page and saw "2 new" standing next to board "Feature requests". I went into the board and saw only one new. Why that? Are there postings hidden or what?

chessmec: You must have hidden someone?

chessmec: Yes, when someone is hidden - they can still post, and it will show as a "new" message, but no one will see them.

grenv: no, i have NOBODY on hidden. But I noticed that all postings from danoschek are suddenly not here ...

BIG BAD WOLF: I tried to hide somebody for testing ... then a list appeared that I had set this persopn to hidden. I took it back and all got OK.
So I have nobody hidden here. Hey ... it is necessary to run a cron at my server, WGETting every 15 seconds http://brainking.com/game/Board?bc=3 ?!

nobleheart: Kids would be better off with a sense of reality, life's gonna hit 'em eventually anyway. Parents should quit trying to get off the hook for raising their hoodlums by forcing others to stifle. Oh yeh, and TV is not a babysitter.

chessmec: Moderators can choose to hide someone from all users - that is what you are seeing.... well not seeing.

* * * * PLEASE - Lets get back to FEATURE REQUESTS EVERYONE!

chessmec: Moderators hide people too. I'm sure they have thousands silenced. It's easier (for them) than having a debate. Just ignore the ghosties ;)

they can't let me be visible on heret as I won't stop to demand a monitor function,
that shows transparently which fiddle-dweeb deleted what (own baiting included)
on which board, hidden persons listed for everyone with DATES when and by whom ... ~*~

BIG BAD WOLF: * * * * PLEASE - Lets get back to FEATURE REQUESTS EVERYONE!

My question: Is the case in what I asked in "[OT] strange ... but can me somebody explain this?" a BUG or a FEATURE?

Hidden people can still post.

Post get a red (1 new) message for each post.

Users can not see hidden post.

So it depends on how you look at it. The (1 NEW) message is a feature so people know there are new posts. But since the new post is hidden, then some may look at it as being a bug since even though there is a new post, it can not be read.

gekrompen hoofd: especially in today's fast paced society..the media for example bombards kids from infancy..not always with positive,healthy behavior patterns.
it is hard for parents to compete as they try to raise there kids descently.

working against this is the system making most 2 parent families work long hours to survive.so kids are raised up as "latch key kids"..whose only role models are rap-gangsta-drug-stars.

also working against this is parents who arent actively involved with their kids as much as they could be.

http://www.occultopedia.com/images/topic/window_ghost.jpg

ok ok we should really as the man says get back on topic..anyone want to discuss general stuff c u in the general board.

nobleheart: Heh, I'm banned from the general board, o well...

BIG BAD WOLF: What is the point of telling people there are new posts when they can't seem them? Doesn't that just confuse the poor souls?

My feature request is something else again -- I think there should be an automatic notification sent in a pm to the person who is banned/hidden, reason stated. And also when they are unbanned/unhidden, no reason required.

Fair idea, no?

BIG BAD WOLF: So it depends on how you look at it. The (1 NEW) message is a feature so people know there are new posts. But since the new post is hidden, then some may look at it as being a bug since even though there is a new post, it can not be read.

Exactly THAT I mean. It is a bug. And if you find irony in my posting you can keep it yourself.

chessmec: I view it as a good feature, not as a bug. Until the time that there's a list of banned people, I like knowing that someone has been put on hide even if it is indirectly. It also doesn't mean that someone is on hide, the post might be deleted at the same time you click to the discussion board. When there's 47 posts in the little number, do you really count each post to see if any are missing?

A request. I would like to be able to see hidden messages from people put on hide by the moderator. The postings revealed to me in this manner would only show on my screen, but I could make up my own decision about them. The moderator could carry on with their job of keeping the board safe and on topic. Only those people that actually wanted to view the posts would have access to them.

Walter Montego: When there's 47 posts in the little number, do you really count each post to see if any are missing?

Because of the censorship i am making regularly snapshots, so it is easy for me to recognize which of the past posting were hidden.

So, if hiding, then do it very well. I saw it not directly but in a way which surely is not planned ... "2 new" but in the board only one.

Only those people that actually wanted to view the posts would have access to them.
People can hide postings themselves. Why that?