If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Maybe this would be reflected if they would stop being sexist and insulting. Let everyone play chess on a completely equal basis and the numbers will balance more.
Thanks bro, but none of it would be possible without friends like you, Tom, and a whole hoard of others!
I noticed the Pro Chess League is caught up catering to female chess players:
Female players will give a ten-point bonus to the team's allowable average rating. So if you have a woman in your lineup, your team’s average rating can now be 2510 FIDE. If you have two women, it can be 2520 FIDE and so on. This rule is in place solely because it is good for the league's marketability to have more women playing.
In cafe and casual chess levels for decades I've seen almost an equal participation of male and female. When I ran three Chapter's chess nights per week, yes three per week, it was great to see the equality! The same true with in all the years at Cafe Wim. And multi-generational too.
Why this is not reflected in CFC memberships baffles me.
I recall your excellent work.
Maybe this would be reflected if they would stop being sexist and insulting. Let everyone play chess on a completely equal basis and the numbers will balance more.
Why is it sad? If women do not like to play chess as much as men, then so what? As a result of this shall we run special tournaments just for them, special tournaments where males are NOT allowed, so as to try to induce more females to play?
In cafe and casual chess levels for decades I've seen almost an equal participation of male and female. When I ran three Chapter's chess nights per week, yes three per week, it was great to see the equality! The same true with in all the years at Cafe Wim. And multi-generational too.
Why this is not reflected in CFC memberships baffles me.
Last edited by Neil Frarey; Tuesday, 27th December, 2016, 05:28 PM.
Historically, men certainly have been and perhaps still are afraid to lose chess games to women. So they have contrived a way to buy the women off by offering them their own trinkets. Some women accept trinkets and some do not.
Either way, we are now in the 21st Century. Let's get over it and simply have males and females play chess together.
But I would prefer the women and men together, not segregated. It would be far more exciting and interesting, and it would do far more to encourage females to play. Sticking the girls off on their own as if they are second-rate players is wrong. They are not.
I do not understand anyone who prefers it as it is now. Would this World Rapid not be a lot better if the women and men were in one tournament?
What does it serve having females play a segregated event?
Think of how much fun it would be when two women happened to get paired!! I could go on and on. Imagine if one of the women beat Magnus!! Think of the fun it would be when a woman WON an event!!!!! AND DO NOT TELL ME THEY CANNOT. SO WHY DO THEY NEED THEIR OWN EVENTS????
Female exclusive events have ruined chess. They have ruined this great tournament we have the pleasure of watching at this time.
All of this fun is lost by the 19th century attitude of segregation in chess.
I am at this time watching the World Rapid Chess Championships. Great stuff for sure!!
What I find sad is the fact that because they have a segregated event, we are not getting to see the women play much. I think this event would be much better if the women and the men were in one tournament. Then the women would get lots of coverage and maybe more new females would be interested in playing. To stick the women off on their own someplace else disgusts me. Why not have them play with the men? Think of how much fun it would be when they knocked off the men in individual games!!
Last edited by Brad Thomson; Tuesday, 27th December, 2016, 10:50 AM.
Is there anyone willing to state that females, because they are females, are not as capable of playing chess as well as males, who because they are males, are more capable of playing chess than females?
Is there anyone willing to state that males, because they are males, are not as capable of playing chess as well as females, who because they are females, are more capable of playing chess than males?
So why do we need or want segregated events in this modern, advanced, politically correct age? Paul, are we not guilty of 19th Century thinking on this?
Hi Brad:
Years ago, then multi-time Canadian women's champion, Nava Starr (Then Shterenberg) made, I believe, a presentation to the CFC governors, or at some CFC event, that clearly was:
Women are inferior to men at chess, due to biological differences.
This was raised on Chesstalk some time ago in the context of the identical issue being discussed. Sasha Starr, her husband, posted here on Ct some info on this. Maybe some expert Ct researcher can locate it?
I believe there are now some more current scientific papers that support Nava's earlier position (but I think it is still somewhat controversial), but I do not have them saved in my file on this issue.
Yup, and it's sad to see of the total CFC members only 6% are female.
Why is it sad? If women do not like to play chess as much as men, then so what? As a result of this shall we run special tournaments just for them, special tournaments where males are NOT allowed, so as to try to induce more females to play?
Last edited by Brad Thomson; Tuesday, 27th December, 2016, 08:33 AM.
Brad, I think you are still being called an a-hole, it's just that you are being grouped in with all men. .
Paul, this is typical of your personality. Why do you possess such a need to dig into possible literal interpretations of what people say instead of seeking the spirit of their comments? The guy apologized, he meant it. So what if he chose words which someone like you like might choose to misinterpret so as to demonstrate stupidity, or whatever the hell it is you think you are demonstrating by this form of conduct? Stop being so obsessed with finding little logical mistakes in what people say. You display profound insecurity by doing so. Try to understand what they mean to say, and if you are not sure, do not jump to conclusions which only serve to reveal the nature of your own problems.
Is there anyone willing to state that females, because they are females, are not as capable of playing chess as well as males, who because they are males, are more capable of playing chess than females?
Is there anyone willing to state that males, because they are males, are not as capable of playing chess as well as females, who because they are females, are more capable of playing chess than males?
So why do we need or want segregated events in this modern, advanced, politically correct age? Paul, are we not guilty of 19th Century thinking on this?
Leave a comment: