Trump Talk

[Caleb Petersen]

So I have noticed a significant trend of political/off topic discussion that occurs on this forum. I'm not against those kinds of threads per-se, however this is a chess discussion related forum. So I decided to compare some of the more successful off topic threads to those that are chess related in some way.

Trump/political Threads:

"Trump" created on January 2, 2017: Replies: 217, Views: 8,745
"The next president of the United States" created on September 26, 2016: Replies: 67, Views: 4,582
"Drain the Swamp?" created on December 8, 2016: Replies: 76, Views: 3,909
"US Elections" created on October 31, 2016: Replies: 286, Views: 13,049
"Trump vs. Clinton: Godwin's Law Has Already Been Fulfilled!" created on June 5, 2016: Replies: 45, Views: 3,290
"Feel the Bern" created on December 8, 2015: Replies: 166, Views: 14,663
"Kasparov the neo-conservative - II" created on September 20, 2014: Replies: 63, Views: 5821
"Occupy Wall Street protest" created on September 29, 2011: Replies: 234, Views: 10,055
"The One and Only Climate Change thread..." created on January 9, 2010: Replies: 1,238, Views: 55,483

Other Off Topic Threads
"The Value of Money" created on September 28, 2016: Replies: 95, Views: 6,689

Now let's compare those numbers to those of the traffic actual chess posts get.

On Topic Threads

"Great chess quotes" created on June 12, 2013: Replies: 333, Views: 26,520
"Women’s World Championship 2017, Tehran" created on December 22, 2016: Replies: 118, Views: 6,772
"Blindfold Chess - the book" created on January 8, 2009: Replies: 667, Views: 60,487
"Games of the Carlsen-Karjakin W.C.C. Match" created on November 10, 2016: Replies: 125, Views: 8,953
More to be added later

The threads that get the most traffic are usually political. They're everywhere. I don't think that should be what a website that is suppose to be about chess should have on it. We should instead have more threads/discussions about chess (e.g. someone might post their chess games from a recent tournament, or discuss chess rules, or anything chess related at all).

Something I think that needs to be done is that it needs to be easier to post chess game content. I have no clue how to post a chess board because it's not intuitive. Even if it was intuitive, just having a stationary chess board is hardly revolutionary in this day and age. I am not saying we need to be able to be able to go through the games, I'm saying it needs to be much easier to post chess content. I would argue it should be easy enough that a person who has some experience with computers who is new to the site should be able to figure it out without help if it's ever going to happen. I realize that not all chess related posts will include chess games, however if we're going to have any posts with games, it needs to be possible to easily post a diagram.

[Nigel Hanrahan]

Re: Trump Talk

The Chess Federation of Canada Discussion board supports pgn files, etc. as seen over here: ChessCanada.info now supports pgn files. So I suppose you could post some chess content over there and provide a link over here.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Trump Talk

Here's a good example of what a chess site could look like if one wished to have seperate topics from chess discussed in various sub-forums:

http://www.aussiechess.com.au/

Until there is something similar available to Canadian chess circles, chess and non-chess topics are lumped together on just one forum such as chesstalk. It's allowed to some extent by the moderator/administrator since the views of chess personalities on subjects other than chess are arguably of interest, and give possible insight into their general way of thinking, perhaps even at the chess board (someone is aggressive in making their political points? that might be a clue they're a vicious attacker in chess). :) Fwiw, I think there's only so much subject matter and argument one can squeeze out of purely chess topics before the possibilities are virtually exhausted and the crickets chirp for a while. I for one am involved with a chess variant website as a contributor and player, and those people seem to often be borderline geniuses, fwiw. Stimulating stuff to feast the eyes on, anyway, I think. Practically zero political discussions.

http://www.chessvariants.com/

P.S.: Nigel didn't mention that the CFC Discussion Board supports personal blog entries for its members, if they wish to make any.

[Brad Thomson]

Re: Trump Talk

The post that started this thread is in my opinion the worst post I have ever (partially) read on Chesstalk.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Trump Talk

The post that started this thread is in my opinion the worst post I have ever (partially) read on Chesstalk.

Well this certainly

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Trump Talk

Trump/political Threads (descending order):

"Trump" created on January 2, 2017: Replies: 217, Views: 8,745
"The next president of the United States" created on September 26, 2016: Replies: 67, Views: 4,582
"Drain the Swamp?" created on December 8, 2016: Replies: 76, Views: 3,909
"US Elections" created on October 31, 2016: Replies: 286, Views: 13,049
"Trump vs. Clinton: Godwin's Law Has Already Been Fulfilled!" created on June 5, 2016: Replies: 45, Views: 3,290
"Feel the Bern" created on December 8, 2015: Replies: 166, Views: 14,663
"Kasparov the neo-conservative - II" created on September 20, 2014: Replies: 63, Views: 5821
"Occupy Wall Street protest" created on September 29, 2011: Replies: 234, Views: 10,055
"The One and Only Climate Change thread..." created on January 9, 2010: Replies: 1,238, Views: 55,483

WOW, I started 5 of those!
Larry, when do I start receiving royalties?

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Trump Talk

Now I want to start a thread to talk about the fact we're talking about Trump talk.

[Caleb Petersen]

Re: Trump Talk

Until there is something similar available to Canadian chess circles, chess and non-chess topics are lumped together on just one forum such as chesstalk. It's allowed to some extent by the moderator/administrator since the views of chess personalities on subjects other than chess are arguably of interest, and give possible insight into their general way of thinking, perhaps even at the chess board (someone is aggressive in making their political points? that might be a clue they're a vicious attacker in chess). :)

I think it is unlikely that the views of chess players on various subjects are of great interest for a few reasons. Firstly there are several people who regularly post on chesstalk who, from what I can understand, rarely/never play chess. Secondly very few of the post on the political chess threads provide very flattering portraits of the posters.

Of course the moderators can do whatever they want to do with their site, however I am voicing an opinion of disagreement with regards to allowing so much off topic posting. Either discourage/remove it, or separate it (as you suggested) imho. Even if political debates are here to stay I think it's time people realized it's a complete waste of time. Bob Gillanders recently decided to make the wise move of not responding to trolls on chesstalk, and instead post his opinions on his blog. That post exploded into yet another fallacy filled political debate.

Fwiw, I think there's only so much subject matter and argument one can squeeze out of purely chess topics before the possibilities are virtually exhausted and the crickets chirp for a while.

I'm not advocating for strictly chess content only. There is a wide variety of things that could be discussed that are related to chess (e.g chess variants). I'm rather saying that all this political debate doesn't really belong on a forum dedicated to chess. There are plenty of other places to have political debates.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Trump Talk

A simple solution is just not to read the chesstalk political threads. Compiling large numbers of facts and figures about them, and insulting the posters as a group as if from on high is not going change things (fwiw, Bob Gillanders continues to make occasional political posts on chesstalk, as always, and they are certainly opinioned enough).

Look at the CFC board. That board has hardly anything but chess content, yet not much traffic goes to there. In life, politics is a staple of discussion everywhere. Chess or chess related things provide only so much to discuss, if there is little new that's developing.

[Garland Best]

Re: Trump Talk

Of course the moderators can do whatever they want

Assuming there are any.

[Caleb Petersen]

Re: Trump Talk

A simple solution is just not to read the chesstalk political threads.

It would appear that would be the wisest choice of action.

Compiling large numbers of facts and figures about them, and insulting the posters as a group as if from on high is not going change things.

With this post I was merely trying to point out that there are a lot of political discussions that occur. I expected that many others would feel the same way as I do about it; that does not, however, appear to be the case.

Also I did not wish to talk about any specific people (which would lead to immediate, and perhaps justified backlash). There are some who post very logical, and well thought out things. That is not always the case. There are various personal attacks, and poor thinking revealed in some posts. This therefore led me to say that "very few of the post on the political chess threads provide very flattering portraits of the posters" and that the debates were "fallacy filled". I did not intend those to be personally offensive, but rather to be accepted as sometimes (or generally) true about the posts in the political debates. If you wish to disagree with me on that point you are more than welcome to, however it would be nice if you gave reasons for that said disagreement.

Look at the CFC board. That board has hardly anything but chess content, yet not much traffic goes to there. In life, politics is a staple of discussion everywhere. Chess or chess related things provide only so much to discuss, if there is little new that's developing.

I have to disagree. I think there are lots of very interesting things one can talk about relating to chess. Specifically I find analysis of tactical positions quite interesting (the kind of analysis one would do in a vote chess game on chess.com). But to each his own.

[Caleb Petersen]

Re: Trump Talk

The Chess Federation of Canada Discussion board supports pgn files, etc. as seen over here: ChessCanada.info now supports pgn files. So I suppose you could post some chess content over there and provide a link over here.

Thanks for letting me know that was possible. What is the function of that forum?

[Wayne Komer]

Re: Trump Talk

Trump Talk

March 8, 2017

I think Caleb makes his argument well. ChessTalk should be about chess and chess-related topics.

If you look at two very good forums, that of English Chess and the chess.com comments, it can be seen that there is no lack of chess subject matter to talk about.

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewforum....bad74b8b1cdae8

(after the article on Nakamura’s blitz for one):

https://www.chess.com/news/view/naka...d-tuesday-2510
_______

If the majority of ChessTalk comments are about politics, for example, Larry might seriously consider terminating his continued support for the website.

http://forum.chesstalk.com/showthrea...ighlight=worth

Telling someone to just not read the political discussions or go somewhere else is not facing a problem, which could get much worse and possibly end in the demise of ChessTalk.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Trump Talk

Trump Talk

March 8, 2017

I think Caleb makes his argument well. ChessTalk should be about chess and chess-related topics.

If you look at two very good forums, that of English Chess and the chess.com comments, it can be seen that there is no lack of chess subject matter to talk about.

http://www.ecforum.org.uk/viewforum....bad74b8b1cdae8

(after the article on Nakamura’s blitz for one):

https://www.chess.com/news/view/naka...d-tuesday-2510
_______

If the majority of ChessTalk comments are about politics, for example, Larry might seriously consider terminating his continued support for the website.

http://forum.chesstalk.com/showthrea...ighlight=worth

Telling someone to just not read the political discussions or go somewhere else is not facing a problem, which could get much worse and possibly end in the demise of ChessTalk.

It is ok to express opinion on this, BUT....

Trying to take one's opinion and persuade Larry Bevand that he should be leaning in your direction is disrespectful of both him and the CMA Board of Directors. They pay the bills, they know whether they are getting any ROI, they aren't asking for your advice or help in this matter.

Some people are chess purists, and nothing wrong with that. But realize that chess purists are a tiny, tiny minority even among chess followers, who themselves are a tiny minority of the general public.

This site ChessTalk is an extension of Larry's CMA business. It isn't a chess purist site, it isn't devoted to chess purists. Saying that it SHOULD BE such is again disrespectul to Larry and the Board of Directors of the CMA business. The political threads and some other non-chess threads draw in a huge number of views. Views are what drives this site. YOU ARE GETTING ALL THIS FOR FREE! Be respectful of the people paying the bills, even if that means you have to not read certain threads.

If there is "a problem, which could get much worse and possibly end in the demise of ChessTalk" that problem isn't too much non-chess topics on this site. Again, those non-chess topics are driving views. This site is quite amazing, it is a very nice balance of chess material and non-chess material. And even the lack of moderation of the site hasn't really hurt it -- if you don't believe that, go to Craigslist.com and then go to any subject under it's "Discussion Forum" heading. What you see under any of the subjects there will make you want to hurl chunks. ChessTalk is civilized in comparison.

And also realize that you cannot compare ChessTalk to chess.com which draws people from around the world. ChessTalk is an outlier site in the outlier domain of chess, which makes it an order of magnitude more in need of views that chess.com and other such global chess sites.

If you are a chess purist and you want a chess purist site... do it yourself! Be prepared to sink lots of money for no return.

Having said all the above, let me also say I personally appreciate the contributions of the chess purists here. And to them, I would like to suggest a different way of looking at the non-chess threads here:

Each of these threads is very much like a chess game. There are debates going on that don't have pre-determined answers, just like chess itself. Each debate is like a chess game, except that more than 2 people can participate. The very fact that there is a debate means there isn't a definitive answer to the questions being debated, just as there is no definitive answer to the outcome of chess from the standard starting position. And just as in chess, you oftentimes see a draw as the outcome: no one makes a winning argument. But somethimes you do see a winning argument, based on logic just as in chess. Following these threads can be enjoyable, and in fact SHOULD be enjoyable for chess followers. Just as we can learn something by playing back chess games of others, we can all learn something by reading through these non-chess topics.

Or alternatively, you can just avoid them. Just remember you get this site and all its threads FOR FREE. So stop complaining and let Larry Bevand and the CMA decide what is best for this site.

And yes, there is an ugly side... just yesterday I had to call Tom O'Donnell a hypocrite. It's not that I WANT to do that, it's that arguments can be hypocritical and you have to point that out when it happens. In response, Tom attacked me personally by saying he wouldn't want me babysitting his kids if he had any.... well, that's just emotion. It's like fights in hockey. If fights aren't your cup of tea but hockey is, you put up with the fights realizing that it's all part of the emotion of the game, and trying to remove it would be like disinfecting the game making it void of any emotion.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: Trump Talk

(fwiw, Bob Gillanders continues to make occasional political posts on chesstalk, as always, and they are certainly opinioned enough).

You're welcome. :) Me, opinionated? Absolutely.
Kevin, I think we are in agreement that a civilized debate on these interesting topics is preferable to trolls and flame wars. But then, the later certainly drives the traffic. I always keep in mind advise that my mother gave me many years ago, "If you can't say something nice, say nothing at all". Wise words.