Chess Tempo's problem comments are a strength of the site and there is a large range of very interesting and helpful comments. To ensure the problem comments are as useful as possible I'm providing the following guidelines for writing comments,
comments not meeting these guidelines (especially those deemed to be offensive or insulting) may be deleted.
- Before adding a comment consider if other users will be interested in reading that comment. For example, while hearing about your thought processes during the problem is an interesting and useful comment, simply stating how long you took to solve the problem without any other details is not particularly interesting. Similarly "I got this one right." is not that useful by itself and neither is a comment consisting of single words such as "easy" or "hard". Marking personal milestones is ok, for example, "I got this one right and it was one of the hardest problems I've solved." is acceptable. "I got this one right, but struggled for a while on move 3 due to not noticing move X" is also fine.
- Be polite at all times. Don't insult other users when writing comments. There are various forms of this, "You'd have to be a fool to get this one wrong." is one example. A more direct example is, "I read your analysis in the previous comment, and you are a fool!". People make mistakes in their analysis , it is why they are training, it is ok (and highly encouraged) to point out the mistakes, but please do so politely. Remember other users of the site cover a wide range of abilities, insulting someone because they didn't understand something is not only rude, but will likely discourage them from further training. Users insulting others or being generally rude may have their commenting rights removed.
- Don't use language that could be seen as offensive in the comments. Different people have different levels of tolerance of "bad" language, what one person might find acceptable, another may not, please keep that in mind. Furthermore there are children using the system, and parents should be able to feel comfortable that their children can use the site without being exposed to inappropriate language. If you see a comment you find offensive please contact me immediately. Users using offensive language may have their commenting rights removed. Note that using abbreviations or replacing parts of your 'bad' words with '***' where the intended word or phrase is still obvious will still be considered offensive.
- Remember that the problems are computer checked. If you think you've found a refutation for the "best move" then you almost certainly haven't. If you think you've found a move that takes a lot more material or wins more quickly than the best move it is possible , but unlikely. If you've think you've found a move that might win that was marked wrong and you think it should be an alternative then this is more possible, but is still often the result of an analysis error. In the above situations (especially the first two) it is strongly recommended that you check your idea with a chess engine before posting in the comments. Human analysis is still very welcome (and sometimes very necessary for situations the engine doesn't deal with well), but a quick check with an engine can avoid embarrassing comments like, "1.f6 is mate, but I lost points!" when in fact 1.f6 was mate for your opponent :-) Comments containing accurate and detailed analysis are amongst the most useful in the system.
- If you do find a problem you believe is "wrong" (the best move is not best or a winning line leads to a failure instead of a "try again") AND you have performed an engine analysis which supports you, then you might want to report this in the Forum "Chess Problems" area where it's more likely to receive timely action. (Put the problem number in the Subject line. In the body of your post, explain the situation and include concrete variations.)
- Following on from the last guideline, it is ok to say "I don't see why 1.f6 doesn't/does work, can someone explain." as sometimes the point of a problem can be unclear. However it would be ideal if you checked the position yourself before posting, that way you can help others out with a "I tried 1.f6 , but it didn't work due to 2..Be4+" comment. You can be certain that if you have a question about the position others also do, for that reason if you don't have time to do the engine analysis yourself, I'd still prefer if you posted the "Why doesn't 1.f6 work" question as someone else can answer it, helping not just you but others who have the same question.
- When posting analysis or move descriptions, please include move numbers to avoid confusion, this makes it much easier for people who want to reply to your comment. Where possible it is probably best if you can use algebraic notation with English piece designations as it will be understood by the widest number of people. For further details see the
Wikipedia Algebraic Chess Notation article.
- If all you want to point out is that the problem employs a fork, discovery, back rank mate, etc. then use the "Vote For Tag" button to the left of the board.
- Read all previous comments before starting work on yours, sometimes the point you want to make may have already been made by a previous comment.
- Please do not vote comments down simply because they are written in a language you don't understand. Chess Tempo is used by many people who don't speak English, and their non-English comments can be very useful to other non-English speakers who share the comment makers native language.
- Criticism of the problems is encouraged, but if you want to post "this problem is terrible", then please say what you thought was wrong with it , e.g. "this problem is terrible, there was only one legal move!" or "this problem is terrible, I played 1.f6 and was marked wrong but it looks like it wins due to the following line 1..x etc" are both ok. A constant stream of "this problem sucks" with no other details provided will likely get your commenting privileges removed (especially if you're almost always wrong - bad problems exist, but bad analysis is much more common).
- If you see comments that don't meet the above guidelines they should be voted down. If you see a question being asked that was already answered in a previous comment, then these should also be voted down. Problem comments which ask for clarification on a move/line are fine, but mistaken claims like '1.Nf7 is mate in 2, but I was marked wrong' when in fact 1.Nf7 is not mate and lead to a losing position should also be voted down. However when voting down these types of comments, it would be useful if you added a new comment explaining why 1.Nf7 did not mate (without referring directly to the original voted down comment), for example 'Some people are playing 1.Nf7 here, assuming it mates, however it does not mate due to 1...Bxf2+ etc'. Sometimes you will see existing comments of this type that have already had replies, in that case if the reply makes reference to the original mistaken comment, the original comment should not be voted down if it makes the reply difficult to understand without the context of the original comment.
- If you find a comment particularly useful or interesting, you can vote the comment up. This will help protect good comments (and commentors) from inappropriate down votes, but it will also make it possible to eventually provide a view of comments which sorts comments by quality.
- The last guideline is not to let yourself feel too hemmed in by the rules! Don't be afraid to write a long comment, contradict a previous comment, or simply express a contrasting point of view. Whatever you've wondered, someone else has probably wondered too and you're performing a public service. Your voice deserves to be heard and your opinion matters as much as anyone else's.
Regards,
Richard.
