[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums

I don't quite agree ...

Posted By: Chuck Bower
Date: Tuesday, 17 March 2009, at 8:47 p.m.

In Response To: I don't quite agree ... (Tom Keith)

Glad to hear others' thoughts.

I like commentary, and that's what an article is about. And I'm not referring to things like Kit's OLM where a lot of work goes into it EVERY DAY. Ditto full match logs and/or articles which go through a full game, etc.

Newsletter articles are a different beast. There are typically a few positions shown. "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing well". I'd rather not see a position, no matter how good the commentary, if it causes me to change my thinking erroneously. For example (and this happens in books as well as articles) I choose play A. Author discusses plays B and C, saying why one is better. So I conclude "play A must be really bad -- it doesn't even get mentioned". Then I find play A is only a couple ticks worse than best. So if I didn't do the RO myself I'm coerced into altering my thinking when it shouldn't have been altered. Enhanced, yes, but not rejected and retooled.

What do people's computers do overnight? Most either get turned off or (worse) sit there burning coal in idle. Put that bot to use while you're sleeping. It doesn't take that much extra effort and it's the best tool we have. What a shame to ignore a valuable aide. It's not just the author who can gain, it's (more importantly) his/her readers.

Messages In This Thread

 

Post Response
Your Name:
Your E-Mail Address:
Subject:
Message:

If necessary, enter your password below:

Password:
 

 

[ View Thread ] [ Post Response ] [ Return to Index ] [ Read Prev Msg ] [ Read Next Msg ]

BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.