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.
are participation points now in the rating calculation system or not? I heard they couldn't code it in ;
Where did you hear that? I believe that comment may apply to several years ago!
In 2008, a motion was passed to reintroduce participation and bonus points. This meant editing the old code Well we edited the old spaghetti code and the changes were effective July 1, 2008. (When I say we, I mean Vince;)). Thanks again Vince.
Thx. I've sent the link on to Prez. Eric, in case it might be useful.
Bob
I don't know anything about them. It's just a product of a google search. The only thing it does is give a bit of an idea of a price range to expect. Due dilligence has to be done.
This comment about the site not looking professional is, IMHO, like so many other things: very much in the eye of the beholder. I have very little problem with the appearance of the site.
John Cordes
In no particular order,
How about a product search that shows things we don't sell anymore?
- Which also has nothing to do with the ACTUAL equipment store
- Not to mention what you get if you click on the "books and equipment" page
How about an entry page that has to give you instructions on how to use the website?
How about the right sidebar, which is laid out so poorly that the address can't even be properly formatted since the text space is squished?
How about how at the top you can click on Français and get a broken link page?
How about the About Us page which throws a ton of info at you in one big paragraph, then has contact information (hello contact us page!) - and then the mention of the Pugi Fund (which might actually be good info to be right on the about us page).
Why the heck is the site called the "Legacy" site anyway?
The Canadian Open / Closed pages request bids/sponsors but provide no information of the rich history of these two events - ie, no reason why you SHOULD bid on or sponsor such an event.
The CYCC page is actually fairly decent, just out of date. Oh and the random bright green colour that occurs nowhere else on the site. (Hello CSS!)
The CFC Handbook page is not too bad, but it badly needs a built-in search, maybe a PDF version.
Chess Clubs - again, the inconsistent colours, and also not in alphabetical order anymore. <-- That's REALLY unprofessional looking!
Crosstables/Ratings - way too much advertising! And it's stuff we don't even sell anymore!
The actual ratings / crosstable pages don't have the menu bar or really any link to anything except - of course - the Product Search! Incidentally when I ran a webstats study on the site several years ago, I found over 75% of visitors to the site never see ANYTHING other than these two pages.
FAQ is almost completely irrelevant and is missing several FAQs.
GLs look good 2006 and older, but the newer ones are a jumbled mess.
Links - the colours again (another new kind of green!)
Memberships and Rating Fees - not too bad, but under Benefits again we have a big paragraph thrown at us. A list would be nice, since that's what it actually is.
Olympiad page is nice, one of the best on the site. But it should make clear that it was the 2008 team that has their pictures there.
Contact Us page is HORRIBLE. The first three have no name, no picture, just titles. Yeah THAT looks professional.
Schools page - again links to a version of the store that doesn't exist anymore. And even better, this one has a DIFFERENT left sidebar than the rest of the site!
News - poor old news, way down at the bottom and not updated in 6 months.
Fix all that and you might have a start on a reasonable website. And that took me almost a half hour to go through, I'm sure there's more.
I'm just sick today and can't do anything other than use my laptop in bed so it's not like I have anything better to do :p
My offer was only semi-serious. We don't really have time to do it so we'd overcharge for the work to make it worthwhile. It was just to make the point that $20k is vastly too high for what is needed.
I think you could get it done for less. If you were willing to keep the same basic "look" as the old site (ie not much need for new graphics) then perhaps MUCH less.
Chris,
You're a CFC governor according to your signature line. In your capacity as a governor, how much do you think the CFC should be paying for a new web site?
One of the guys in England I used to exchange emails with wrote schemingmind.com in his spare time. Kind of a hobby, I think. I've never played there because I've been too busy with ICCF international games but maybe soon.
Here is another differing opinion - one that says we need to replace the existing site - by CFC V-P in charge of office matters, Stijn de Kerpel ( posted on the CFC Chess Forum ):
" Website Design
Here is my opinion, and I will preface this by saying that I am not a techie by any means. I appreciate the CFC members who are in the IT field who have come forward with opinions on this :
The CFC website is from the 1990's. As Ed Seedhouse and other members of the IT community have stated, it is WAY outdated and has a host of problems. My biggest problem with the website is our total lack of documentation - the fact that no one really knows exactly how the site works anymore is a major problem.
Another problem is as Chris has stated is that it requires ASP support - which is (from what I understand) something very few providers provide support to anymore - which makes it all the more difficult when we ask someone to find the problem and solve it, or even to do some enhancements.
The CFC website is a mix of patches and platforms and is an absolute mess (to quote our contractor). We need to do something as it's cumbersome and not very useful at the moment "
Then on the CFC Governors' Discussion Board, he stated as well:
" We [ the Executive ] are proposing to get bids for a new CFC website. We have consulted with CFC members who are in the IT community who have indicated the need for a new website. The website as it currently exists is outdated and has many errors in it.
My chief concern is the lack of documentation that currently exists for the CFC website. It makes it extremely difficult to find and solve problems. The site (as already stated by others) is extremely vulnerable to attacks."
Any comments on his view?
Also, from reading the posts, it seems that Alex Ferreira and maybe Vlad Drkulec ( and others? ) agree with you that the old site is fine and should be kept. Do they have any thoughts on Stijn's opinions?
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Sunday, 20th September, 2009, 12:43 PM.
As a former ED who had to work with the existing site all the time:
Was the existing CFC Website so difficult to work with that you think it now needs to be junked, and a new one created from scratch?
Having worked with it on a daily basis, you are in a unique position to comment - or could you get Vince to answer this question?
Thanks.
Bob
Bob, thanks for asking. I do have a lot to say on the matter, but since I am not technically proficient in computer stuff, I will defer to Vincent Chow on many questions. I will ask Vince for his thoughts and report back. In the meantime, some general comments.
The executive should not rush into any new website just because the money is available. Properly documented proposals, with specs and costs, from competent people please. If we are going to spend money on a new website, let's do it correctly. Don't turn it into another scandal.
Chris Mallon's long list of website wrongs is a mixture of both complaints with design and content. A new website will not fix content issues. Allocating more time for the staff to update content will.
I haven't voted in your poll, yet. The answer really depends on the cost involved and the competency of the contractor. The poll (no vote) seems to imply that most members believe the website performs the basic tasks adequately. However, some of the NO votes maybe the result of not trusting the executive to spend money wisely, or wishing for other priorities.
The website is old. If your poll was "Should the executive consider proposals for a new website, with costs and technical specifications, and references, etc. my answer is YES." Then bring it forward for governor discussion.
Thx - I realize cost is a factor, but my poll was more to get a gut reaction from members whether they were satisfied generally with the existing website, and didn't want to spend money on something that really wasn't absolutely necessary. I would guess this to be the position of the majority of " No " voters. It may mean the Executive has a big selling job with the general membership to convince them this project is necessary.
I'll look forward to Vince's views on the old site, since he was so intimately involved with it for so long. I mean he used it, and seemed to keep it running. But how difficult was it, how much time did the antiquities take to deal with, and are there many new benefits/possibilities that would come with a modern site, that cannot be done with the old existing one?
Here is another differing opinion - one that says we need to replace the existing site - by CFC V-P in charge of office matters, Stijn de Kerpel ( posted on the CFC Chess Forum ):
" Website Design ...
My chief concern is the lack of documentation that currently exists for the CFC website. ..."
Any comments on his view?
Bob
This was known as far back as 1996. Deen Hergott, Brad Thomson and I tried to get the Executive to force Troy Vail to provide documentation for the rating program, website and accounting program. They appear to never have done so, and the rest is history.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
I think it is good if the CFC is getting former members and non-members interested enough in CFC issues that they would vote ( only about 20 % of viewers ever vote in these polls ). I think CFC is therefore carrying out its mandate to promote chess beyond simply its membership.
And not having a membership, does not mean their opinion is wrong ! It still may be very good advice to the CFC, even if from outside.
Re: A New CFC Website?? Is Documentation Critical For CFC?
Hi Tom:
But I don't get it - Deen Hergott, Brad Thompson, You, Gerry Litchfield, Vince Chow ( and I don't know who I've missed ) have all been able to provide the members with all the basic essential services for years now WITHOUT the documentation. So why now is the lack of documentation so critical?? Everyone seems to be able to get along without it - and Bob Gillanders implies in one of his posts, that even without the documentation, Vince was able to get enough of an understanding of it to be able to deal with the problems ( and do some upgrading? ). Can we not continue on for the moment with what we have, without the documentation, until we run into a total impasse because we don't have it and need it? At that point then, we may have to say " uncle " and spring for a new site - but that may be years down the road, given that we've already survived for years without it.
Can some techie explain this to me?
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Sunday, 20th September, 2009, 03:21 PM.
But I don't get it - Deen Hergott, Brad Thompson, You, Gerry Litchfield, Vince Chow ( and I don't know who I've missed ) have all been able to provide the members with all the basic essential services for years now WITHOUT the documentation. So why now is the lack of documentation so critical?? Everyone seems to be able to get along without it - and Bob Gillanders implies in one of his posts, that even without the documentation, Vince was able to get enough of an understanding of it to be able to deal with the problems ( and do some upgrading? ). Can we not continue on for the moment with what we have, without the documentation, until we run into a total impasse because we don't have it and need it? At that point then, we may have to say " uncle " and spring for a new site - but that may be years down the road, given that we've already survived for years without it.
Can some techie explain this to me?
Bob
I think its as straight forward as what they taught us in high school, without documentation the person after you has to reinvent the wheel, wasting time that could be spent on making improvements instead of re-learning the system the hard way.
Re: A New CFC Website?? Is Documentation Critical For CFC?
Hi Zeljko:
But it seems they have spent almost no time " re-learning the system " or " reinventing the wheel ". All the ED's have done their jobs and kept all the members' services coming, without all the documentation. The system seems to be pretty well designed and seems to be running pretty much on its own ( credit to Troy Vail? ).
For the sake of documentation that everyone has gotten along without for years, CFC should shell out $ 10,000 of their hard-earned surplus for a new site?
Tweet
Comment