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.
Although I am not a great contributor to this thread, I faithfully do read it. The 2nd version of this thread started by Gary Ruben is now too unwieldy, and takes very long to load to see new posts. There was some discussion in it about starting a new thread , but no one of the regulars took the bull by the horns and did it. I like following this thread, and am tired of the loading time.
So would everyone mind now using this new 3rd version of the climate change discussion?
Re: Climate Change ( 3rd Version ) - Assertion & Denial
There are a number of threads on ChessTalk that really need a separate blog. Then maybe we could have a sidebar directing interested parties to that site.
Perhaps any thread that achieves 10,000 reads could be automatically converted to such a blog. :) With all the computer savvy geniuses who post on ChessTalk, surely one of them must know how to do that.:):)
Not ok with me. I was hoping the thread would die, and the posters would decamp to a more appropriate forum. Oh well... I don't read it.
I blame myself...bitterly. :(
Long ago, I posted my doubts about global warming in the now inactive 'Welcome to the Depression' thread. Mr. Seedhouse replied in disagreement, and matters spiralled out of control from there...
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
The Windsor Star ( surely not!! ) ... or....Environment Canada...or....both??
Bob A
People who have not had the experience of being interviewed can become quite upset when they see the final results of their interview in the newspaper. I tend to look at the broad picture and see whether they got the basics correct. What is written is jotted down from notes at the time of the interview and unless the interview is being recorded you can't expect too much other than filling in the big brush strokes. The reporter is also trying to simplify the story so that the average reader can quickly comprehend what they want to convey. When you realize that newspapers are in the entertainment business you don't take every pronouncement too seriously.
For example, on the global warming, green energy front the head of one of those green energy companies sucking the life out of Hydro rate payers and taxpayers and the lifeblood of the Ontario economy wrote a big rambling opinion editorial article on the idea that electricity prices momentarily spiked up to the levels being paid under Ontario's green energy program. Because of this momentary spike the high feed in tariffs were justified by his reasoning. It was a poorly reasoned article and worse it offered proof with links to the Ontario Energy Board. It is bad form to show that you have a reading comprehension problem by linking to material that shows the exact opposite of what you are claiming.
I checked the links and found that the whole premise of the article which was demonstrably false given even a little business or economic sense (it is the weighted average cost of different electricity prices that is more relevant rather than momentary spikes). The kicker was that the whole premise was false and based on a misreading of the graph on the website that he was linking to. The "spike" was actually a spike to prices that were one tenth of what the writer was claiming it was and thus still far below the Green Energy premiums being paid by the Ontario Government. Green energy proponents aren't very good at math (like Obama has admitted). I wrote a letter which pointed out the fallacy of his arguments and also the mathematical error that he had made but it never made it into the newspaper. I guess some sacred cows can't be questioned.
Last edited by Vlad Drkulec; Tuesday, 6th November, 2012, 11:36 AM.
Re: Climate Change ( 3rd Version ) - Assertion & Denial
I agree. This is totally off topic.
However, as people with a common interest in Chess, we may want to discuss other topics from time to time. As such, the moderators of this site should add a separate section for general discussion. This is the case with almost all other message boards, and should be the same here.
Tweet
Comment