This forum just doing fine. Being smart r too......
#8 @SteveEricJordan This is a fair question, but Lichess doesn't plan feature development, so I can only speak about what I'm going to do... which right now isn't much, sorry.
I've tried to understand a part of lichess... but I can't understand any of it.
I saw the discord but I don't have any specific questions.
_____________________________________
Well, actually, I wonder,
"In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player's king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9, PDF).
In rare cases this can be difficult to decide automatically (forced lines, fortresses). By default we always side with the player who did not run out of time.
Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has a piece that could block the king."
- Lichess FAQ > Gameplay > Losing on time, drawing, and insufficient material
It's impossible for the losing side to win,
if the losing side has ___, and the winning side has ____
bishop vs queen
bishop vs rook
knight vs queen
But i'm looking at github.com/ornicar/scalachess
And I don't know Scala
_______________________________
Lucky for me, Scala is some type of js. Hmm.
Looking at ....
www.scala-lang.org/ > docs.scala-lang.org/ > docs.scala-lang.org/getting-started/index.html > www.scala-exercises.org/scala_tutorial/terms_and_types
Wow. String concatenation uses 2 pluses instead of one? That's pretty interesting....
______________________________
I saw the discord but I don't have any specific questions.
_____________________________________
Well, actually, I wonder,
"In the event of one player running out of time, that player will usually lose the game. However, the game is drawn if the position is such that the opponent cannot checkmate the player's king by any possible series of legal moves (FIDE handbook §6.9, PDF).
In rare cases this can be difficult to decide automatically (forced lines, fortresses). By default we always side with the player who did not run out of time.
Note that it can be possible to mate with a single knight or bishop if the opponent has a piece that could block the king."
- Lichess FAQ > Gameplay > Losing on time, drawing, and insufficient material
It's impossible for the losing side to win,
if the losing side has ___, and the winning side has ____
bishop vs queen
bishop vs rook
knight vs queen
But i'm looking at github.com/ornicar/scalachess
And I don't know Scala
_______________________________
Lucky for me, Scala is some type of js. Hmm.
Looking at ....
www.scala-lang.org/ > docs.scala-lang.org/ > docs.scala-lang.org/getting-started/index.html > www.scala-exercises.org/scala_tutorial/terms_and_types
Wow. String concatenation uses 2 pluses instead of one? That's pretty interesting....
______________________________
If lichess doesn't want to make an official "serious discussion" forum, there is nothing stopping anyone else from doing so, and even from advertising it on comment threads discussing the non-serious nature of the official forums here. Last I checked (admittedly years ago now) there were many serious user-run discussion groups on chess.com, in addition to one official "serious discussion" forum. For the most part it worked well, though I would have liked the option to have blocked certain users posts from view, even if I didn't think they should have been banned completely. Not sure why lichess is so far behind in this matter (maybe someone can inform me), but I have yet to find a serious "team"/group that isn't comatose (no discussions in the past 6+ months) here. Maybe a victim of the culture war that has (IMO) crippled reddit and other big tech outlets?
And if nobody wants to mod, I'm wondering if community standards could be upheld by polling users, both in terms of what the rules should be and in terms of who to punish for breaking rules and for how long.
With that said, if anyone has a forum here or elsewhere that has decent, open-minded discussions going on, please let me know :)
And if nobody wants to mod, I'm wondering if community standards could be upheld by polling users, both in terms of what the rules should be and in terms of who to punish for breaking rules and for how long.
With that said, if anyone has a forum here or elsewhere that has decent, open-minded discussions going on, please let me know :)
#23 @StevenEmily Take a look at github.com/ornicar/scalachess/tree/master/src/test/scala since the rules differ by variant. Lichess never allows a losing player to claim a draw by timing out.
Quiete ironic how my point gets confirmed in this very thread. The post from @StevenEmily is completely off topic and should be deleted. This exact kind of extremely weird behavior is ruining this forum.
@SteveEricJordan
I read every post here with great interest.You may not be aware of efforts being made to clear up the off topic forum a bit.It has achieved good ,noticeable results so far,and those who like to create/play forum games like it because it "freezes" things in place,thus giving ready access,rather than having to trawl through the last 24 hrs quagmire .
lichess.org/forum/team-forum-games-team
@clousems is the instigator.
I read every post here with great interest.You may not be aware of efforts being made to clear up the off topic forum a bit.It has achieved good ,noticeable results so far,and those who like to create/play forum games like it because it "freezes" things in place,thus giving ready access,rather than having to trawl through the last 24 hrs quagmire .
lichess.org/forum/team-forum-games-team
@clousems is the instigator.
#26 I agree but unless development or moderation changes, this sort of "hijack" behavior will be handled on a case-by-case basis. In general I ignore these, although in this case they put quite a bit of effort into writing the question so I provided a terse response. If they had asked in a separate topic I probably would have provided a detailed response.
#28 I didn't even see any question in #23 :-) Couldn't you have moved the post to a separate/new thread?
#29 Maybe, I don't know.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.