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.
No quote can be reliable until there is a specification of what is to be done.
The look and feel of a new site might require a design and the creation of graphics even before getting into programming costs. It can be expensive to hire a graphic artist but the results are usually better.
The creation of specification might consider the use of content management systems, security, off the shelf components, databases etc.
We're mixing two very different actions in this discussion. First, there is the mark-up of text to make it look nice in a web browser.
Second, there is programming which involves processing data (say the results of a tournament) to produce new data (say the finish-order crosstable of said tournament and the new ratings).
Inconveniently, there is also web scripting which may involve both.
The vast bulk of the CFC website involves mark-up. It is not subject to viruses.
If you got access to a password, a back door or an exploit that allowed you to insert your own links or code for a popup into an html or php page you could infect someone accessing that page with a virus or spyware even though the mark-up itself isn't infected. Sites get hacked in this way on a fairly regular basis.
There are sites where you can type in text, they will mark it up for you and display (host) it for free. When I hear the concept "design a web site", I think of that. It's basically free. You can make it look good or bad, but if you use CSS, even your bad sense of aesthetics can often be washed away. Also, mark-up is open, anybody can see it by clicking > View > Source in their browser.
Websites that use php can be a bit harder to follow if you don't have access to the ftp directory and all of the files. The source listing will show source from the relevant php pages and it might be difficult to separate it out when you are trying to reverse engineer the site. Sometimes the php pages even behave and display differently in different browsers (which can be quite annoying).
Php allows you to program web pages and change portions of the content, based on user or programmer input without changing everything at once. You can have php pages nested within php pages so that it is not immediately obvious where the html and php code that is generating a portion of a particular page actually resides until you go back and look at all of the relevant php pages.
But what I think is really meant in this disucssion is more towards the programming side of the spectrum. The CFC rating and membership program was written by me circa 1980. In 1997, Troy Vail thought it was time to rewrite the program. I'm a bit vague on what language he wrote it in, but it was a Microsoft language in the Visual BASIC - Access - Access BASIC family. CFC paid for his training! He examined my code from 1980, and phoned me a couple of times with questions, but he rewrote all the code.
That probably means either Visual Basic 4 or Visual Basic 5 which came out in 1997 and the database could be converted or the data read with a current copy of Access.
It is conceivable to spend $20,000 designing a website. You'd need a darned good reason, though. The most popular website in the world, google, has a spare laconic design that might have cost $1.49, but the company is worth billions. So much for eye candy. Other sites may provide extras (games database at chessgames.com, wmv videos at chessclub.com, game replay software at almost everywhere but not necessarily the CFC...).
I think that what is being suggested is not a re-design, but re-programming.
It is ironic that the CFC website has been split up (not necessarily a bad thing) and immediately we are faced with the proposal to re-design a stub of the former site for $20,000 ! Is it just me, or is anybody else basking in the Zen of this 21st century CFC-ishness?
And excuse me for melding mark-up with programming.
Incidentally, the CFC site might be down, but anybody who wants to examine typical CFC website code (and see the screen results!) can do so via the Internet Archive - Wayback Machine. They seem to have stopped collecting info in early 2008, I'm not sure why, but there's many pages for 2000 to 2007.
I found the legacy site to be the most useful part of the whole thing. Ratings and Tournament Announcements was what I consulted the most and what I miss the most during the current drought.
No quote can be reliable until there is a specification of what is to be done.
The look and feel of a new site might require a design and the creation of graphics even before getting into programming costs. It can be expensive to hire a graphic artist but the results are usually better.
The creation of specification might consider the use of content management systems, security, off the shelf components, databases etc.
Most web design firms either have graphic designers on staff or bring one in to do those elements of the design. In most cases that would be included in the $100 per page fee.
Apparently the framework is already there according to Vincent Chow. Whoever is taking care of the website just needs to get up to speed on Joomla and php and stop shoveling something stinky. I would settle for what they called the legacy site being put back up so that I can check ratings and know the details of tournaments for those few organizers who don't post the details here on Chesstalk.
I also strongly disagree for spending $20K for a new CFC website, that is certainly too much.
:(
Me I propose CFC call the new FQE President to have a copy of their site and/or rating system or even integrate both rating systems together. They could even run the CFC system on their servers or on Chess'N Math systems. Larry also has a programmer looking to rebuild the website!!! Lets take the same base for everybody. FQE has a good base.
We need to work together. It does not help quebecers to have a poor CFC. It could be cheap solution too. A few thousands dollars.
Larry says that the new FQE President Marc Poulin wants the whole community to work together. I spoke with the president this weekend and his team will make this year a Quebec Youth Chess Tournament WITH Chess'N Math which was something simply impossible with passed politicians at the FQE. I was so surprised!!!!
You have the president email on the fqe website. The CFC must try it. We are in 2009, things evoluate.
And if the FQE president can not do it for various good reasons, write me and I will try to be elected FQE president in two years and have a free copy for CFC and Chess'n Math if they want it.
Not to mention Eric's statement (at least the part about making it difficult for others to work on) was completely true. They even have competitions for who can write the most obfuscated source code.
In that case, the simplest thing is to :
1. take the whole site in a code editor ;
2. remove all previous code : mark-up, code, template, whatever ;
3. rebuild from scratch.
Steps 1 and 2 take about 30 seconds. (That's not a figure of speech, it really does !) Step 3 takes about a week or so for a little site, provided you don't have that much logic underneat. And that goes from design to publishing. If you deal with agile companies that can make your site with their own logic, it could even take about a day's work.
I fail to see what kind of logic the CFC site needs that gobble all that resource : a database with login ID, IP traces and temporary cookies ?
A few thousands is not that expensive anyway : one can have it cheaper, one can have it costlier. It all depends on what has been asked for, really.
Last edited by Benoit St-Pierre; Tuesday, 15th September, 2009, 10:58 PM.
A few thousands is not that expensive anyway : one can have it cheaper, one can have it costlier. It all depends on what has been asked for, really.
Twenty thousand is about half a year's revenues. A bit too much when they already have a site that is free of viruses and just waiting on Google approval :p
Twenty thousand is about half a year's revenues. A bit too much when they already have a site that is free of viruses and just waiting on Google approval :p
Vladimir Drkulec
Who the hell waits for Google? Put the site back on the air and let Google scan it whenever the hell they get around to it. Put a notice on the site that says "Google is full of sh1t" or whatever. Move on.
A buck more than what they should already be paying in maintenance is too much for that. The one who maintains the site should be the one who does that maintenance. That is, if there is someone. Is there ?
Building a website is a breeze. Maintaining one is an annoyance. So what is being asked from the outsourcee, exactly?
Last edited by Benoit St-Pierre; Wednesday, 16th September, 2009, 01:09 AM.
Jean Hebert wrote: Is it possible on this site to express legitimate opinions without having some professionnal second guesser coming in with some righteous advice to protect who knows who from who knows what ?
Ken replied: It is normal business practice not to slag former employees of an organization. Re-read the quote, Jean it was more than a "legitmate opinion"
I see some irony in you using the phrase "professional second guesser."
I chose Joomla as the Content Management System because it is argueably the most popular and best supported. If I chose anything else I could be accused of locking it to myself. The problem is that the present administration was chosen despite inadequate knowledge of PHP and Joomla.
Nobody consulted me about this virus. All sites are subject to attack. We were attacked last year, but I took care of it the same day! If the virus has been cleaned then the site can be used and then a decision can be made on a new site at a later time. This legacy website was developed years before my time. It was probably state of the art at that time. If still works why not use it? Also, there is no reason why the webzine as is cannot be reinstated. There is little difference between a webzine and a newsletter.
$20K is too much for a new website.
I never worried (much) about this computer virus stuff when I was ED. Vince was always there doing backups, virus scans, fixes, upgrades, and whatever else computer gurus do to navigate the treacherous waters of cyberspace. I was always very thankful that I had a qualified and dedicated individual attending to our computer needs. Sometimes the right person for the job isn't always the cheapest.
I am no computer techy, so feel free to correct me, but:
1. If the site is now clean, why not go online and let the google bots scan it and declare it good. Would they not just delete the warning automatically instead of us waiting for some tech department administrator to delete us from the "no fly list".
2. If the solution above is not so easy, and given virus attacks appear commonplace in todays world, should we have a backup plan. Perhaps an alternate website ready to go online in case of virus attacks. It sounds like creating new websites is easy these days. I am thinking of a basic site with a tournament listing and rating list only.
Here's an idea: Perhaps one of the better (not Ontario) provincial websites could act as a backup site (just some basic info) in times of crisis.
Once again, thanks Vince for 70 weeks of uninterrupted uptime!:)
$100 per page obfuscates what work is being done. Should there be 100 pages in the site then this would cost $100x100=$10,000.
Most development tools operate on a template or master page. Once graphics are developed they can easily be incorporated into the other pages which could make use of the same banners and buttons etc.
Putting together a requirements document would be a start - including the number of pages to be developed.
The requirements could identify what is needed vis a vis graphics, database, security, content management, etc. This would allow setting budgets against each requirement.
What is being developed and how it is to be developed should be decided up front by management.
Many people have commented on missing the CFC site to check ratings. A project could involve just getting that up in running.
The CFC was going to, until everyone raised their objections. There was a reason for the :p.
"I used to be disgusted.
Now I try to be amused." Elvis Costello, The Angels Want to Wear My Red Shoes.
Put the site back on the air and let Google scan it whenever the hell they get around to it. Put a notice on the site that says "Google is full of sh1t" or whatever. Move on.
Apparently the website was working for a time today. It wasn't working when I visited it.
Vladimir Drkulec
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Wednesday, 16th September, 2009, 09:24 PM.
$100 per page obfuscates what work is being done. Should there be 100 pages in the site then this would cost $100x100=$10,000.
Or they could put up a home page, a ratings page and a tournament announcement page and it would only cost $300.
Most development tools operate on a template or master page. Once graphics are developed they can easily be incorporated into the other pages which could make use of the same banners and buttons etc.
Putting together a requirements document would be a start - including the number of pages to be developed.
If you have money to burn then by all means. If you are fiscally challenged, you should make do with what you have.
The requirements could identify what is needed vis a vis graphics, database, security, content management, etc. This would allow setting budgets against each requirement.
What is being developed and how it is to be developed should be decided up front by management.
Many people have commented on missing the CFC site to check ratings. A project could involve just getting that up in running.
Revamping the website will not increase revenues. Putting up the old page and getting it to work would be sufficient without the need for any projects.
Tweet
Comment