Tweet
1) First Google AI answer to 'which forum is more officious as of 22 july 2026 is it the ecf english chess forum or is it the Chess Chat austrailan chess forum or is it the chess talk canadian chess forum or is it the Chess Federation of Canada Discussion Board or is it LinkedIn in regard to Posts Comments or Replies made there or is it The Chess Variant Pages in regard to Comments being attempted to be made there or is it LiChess in regard to comments being attempted to be made there' (note AI answers may vary per query attempted even if same search keywords used each time)?:
which forum is more officious as of 22 july 2026 is it the ecf english chess forum or is it the Chess Chat austrailan chess forum or is it the chess talk canadian chess forum or is it the Chess Federation of Canada Discussion Board or is it LinkedIn in regard to Posts Comments or Replies made there or is it The Chess Variant Pages in regard to Comments being attempted to be made there or is it LiChess in regard to comments being attempted to be made there
"AI Overview
The English Chess Forum is more strictly moderated and "officious." It enforces specific moderation policies, has mandatory registration, and is heavily monitored by board members. In contrast, Lichess focuses primarily on automated moderation, and Canadian/Australian forums generally utilize relaxed administration styles. [1, 2, 3]
The moderation standards for the platforms differ in the following ways:
2) The second Google AI answer (same keywords were entered, as in the case of the first query that I tried) - note that this 2nd answer includes mention of The Chess Variant Pages, LinkedIn and Canada's chess talk Discussion Board, and thus all 7 sites that I enquired about with my keyword search when using Google's AI are (in some sense, perhaps) possibly all taken into account when ordering how officious each website is, in terms of being officious when compared to the others...
(I'd note that neither The Chess Variant Pages, nor LinkedIn, nor possibly LiChess...
[As a brief aside here, I'll now mention: I voluntarily quit visiting that last website, long before I could find {if at all available on that website, = by using or trying any method that might even be guessed at, if I cared to} any moment-by-moment website viewership 'count' on it. That would {or should} naturally include as viewers any of that website's members for {e.g.} me as a {soon & voluntarily ex-}member of that last website to find & see.]
...seem to offer anywhere on their websites a moment-by-moment viewership 'count' on their websites [at any moment at all on a given day], unlike the remaining 4 websites that I know have such a moment-by-moment count, out of the 7 that I've inquired about, in either of these two Google AI searches that I'm reporting on, here. In any event, the English Chess Forum [ECF] website, when I was last there, easily had the lowest 'record high total' number of viewers [including members] at a given moment, = 80 [and, perhaps among that record high total, many may not all have been human, on that day], of those 4 websites with such counts that I've seen):
"AI Overview
Officiousness is subjective and depends heavily on individual moderation styles, but traditional national forums like the English Chess Forum and ChessTalk (Canada) are governed by strict, specific procedural rules rather than automated filtering. [1, 2, 3]
The platforms vary by the type and strictness of their moderation:
If you can tell me what type of content you are planning to post or which specific rule violation you are concerned about, I can help you choose the best forum for your needs."
Regards, Kevin P.
which forum is more officious as of 22 july 2026 is it the ecf english chess forum or is it the Chess Chat austrailan chess forum or is it the chess talk canadian chess forum or is it the Chess Federation of Canada Discussion Board or is it LinkedIn in regard to Posts Comments or Replies made there or is it The Chess Variant Pages in regard to Comments being attempted to be made there or is it LiChess in regard to comments being attempted to be made there
"AI Overview
The English Chess Forum is more strictly moderated and "officious." It enforces specific moderation policies, has mandatory registration, and is heavily monitored by board members. In contrast, Lichess focuses primarily on automated moderation, and Canadian/Australian forums generally utilize relaxed administration styles. [1, 2, 3]
The moderation standards for the platforms differ in the following ways:
- The English Chess Forum is highly organized and independent, operating with a structured board of rules for general chat and ECF news. [1, 2, 3, 4]
- The Chess Federation of Canada Discussion Board relies primarily on linked forum environments (such as ChessTalk) that maintain a community-driven yet less formal tone. [1, 2, 3]
- Chess Chat (Australia) is also more traditional and less rigidly hierarchical than the ECF. [1]
- Lichess focuses more on game-play and automated bans/censures, so attempting to make comments or forum posts is generally less heavily policed by humans. [1]
- What kind of topic or discussion you are looking to post
- Your primary region or the audience you want to reach
2) The second Google AI answer (same keywords were entered, as in the case of the first query that I tried) - note that this 2nd answer includes mention of The Chess Variant Pages, LinkedIn and Canada's chess talk Discussion Board, and thus all 7 sites that I enquired about with my keyword search when using Google's AI are (in some sense, perhaps) possibly all taken into account when ordering how officious each website is, in terms of being officious when compared to the others...
(I'd note that neither The Chess Variant Pages, nor LinkedIn, nor possibly LiChess...
[As a brief aside here, I'll now mention: I voluntarily quit visiting that last website, long before I could find {if at all available on that website, = by using or trying any method that might even be guessed at, if I cared to} any moment-by-moment website viewership 'count' on it. That would {or should} naturally include as viewers any of that website's members for {e.g.} me as a {soon & voluntarily ex-}member of that last website to find & see.]
...seem to offer anywhere on their websites a moment-by-moment viewership 'count' on their websites [at any moment at all on a given day], unlike the remaining 4 websites that I know have such a moment-by-moment count, out of the 7 that I've inquired about, in either of these two Google AI searches that I'm reporting on, here. In any event, the English Chess Forum [ECF] website, when I was last there, easily had the lowest 'record high total' number of viewers [including members] at a given moment, = 80 [and, perhaps among that record high total, many may not all have been human, on that day], of those 4 websites with such counts that I've seen):
"AI Overview
Officiousness is subjective and depends heavily on individual moderation styles, but traditional national forums like the English Chess Forum and ChessTalk (Canada) are governed by strict, specific procedural rules rather than automated filtering. [1, 2, 3]
The platforms vary by the type and strictness of their moderation:
- English Chess Forum (ECF): Functions with formal sub-boards dedicated to ECF governance, where strict parliamentary-style debates and pedantic adherence to rules are commonplace. [1, 2]
- ChessTalk: Serves as the Canadian discussion board with specific operational terms, focusing primarily on localized tournament updates, federation business, and rule compliance. [1, 2, 3]
- Chess Chat (Australia): Operates with traditional bulletin board rules (FAQ) and covers Australasian chess news, but relies on classic moderator intervention rather than highly corporate policies. [1, 2]
- Lichess: Moderation in its public forums relies heavily on automated filters and community reporting, and is not a traditional "officious" bulletin board. [1, 2]
- The Chess Variant Pages: Uses specialized comment moderation for historical or esoteric design, which can be exacting but is specific to variant theory rather than being generally "officious."
- LinkedIn: Moderation is entirely up to the author of the post/thread. This can lead to heavy-handed censorship or "officious" blocking of replies by individuals, but it depends on the specific user. [1]
If you can tell me what type of content you are planning to post or which specific rule violation you are concerned about, I can help you choose the best forum for your needs."
Regards, Kevin P.