Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 14:24:40 08/24/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2004 at 12:31:14, Steven Schwartz wrote: >Dear CCC Members: >So, what's the answer? There are several choices: > a) some other organization can take over the responsibility of hosting and >running CCC and CTF > b) CCC and CTF can be disbanded and members can rejoin the USENET Newsgroups > c) members can pay a yearly fee to belong > d) members can voluntarily contribute First of all Steven, thanks for your honest posting here. We all really appreciated all your hard work and feel you contributed some to the computerchess history by making this place what it is and always being available for everybody. We also owe a lot to icdchess for running this message board and all the pains derived from it. The commercial rules of the game are however hard and clear. That let's us draw hard conclusions also on what to do next. Important is to save all the historic postings done here and log them somewhere. For me option b and moving back to rec.games.chess.computer is the best option. Not because for certain members it might be the best option, but for computerchess in general it is better. CCC only reaches a few persons. rec.games.chess.computer gets read by hundreds of thousands. So we serve more computerchess fans there. So for the community as a whole it's better to post there than at CCC knowing the CCC will close as we serve a huge number more people in total. Best regards, Vincent >My preference would be either "c" or "d" because I think it is safe to assume >that "b" would be a disaster just as it was back in the mid 1990s, and I do not >think many people want to return to that era. I, personally, do not like "a" >because even though I am sure someone would volunteer to take over the hosting >responsibility, the time and effort and skill of running elections, fixing >problems, coordinating moderator issues and communication, and keeping the board >basically free from unwanted intrusion, is something that we are constantly >working on and fine tuning. This is not a project that runs on its own. And >given a choice between "c" and "d', I would prefer to ask for donations before >forcing everyone to pay. Assuming those who gave voluntarily were generous >enough to make up for those who would choose not to contribute, I think we would >do fine, and we would not have to be concerned that members would drop out >because their free entertainment suddenly had a price attached to it. > >I think everyone will agree that the board, the great majority of the time, runs >extremely smoothly. I am not much of a poster, but I visit and read CCC and CTF >several times a day. I am sure many of you are equally obsessive. I like the >idea that ICD is the host of the CCC and CTF, and I am proud of what we have >helped to create, but I believe it is time for the members to help defray the >expenses. For 7 years that has been our burden, and for the first 4 of those >years what we got back in sales from members basically made the hosting >bearable, but for the last 3 years or so we have absorbed the work and cost, and >it does not look as if the industry is getting any better for the retailer. > >Something needs to be done. I have known it for a long time, but I have said >nothing until now because I felt I owed something back to the chess computer >industry, and I did not want to be perceived as being greedy. But we are way >beyond that point now. > >So, that is the way I perceive issues related to the CCC and CTF. Perhaps you >agree and perhaps you don't, but I am willing to hear what the membership has to >say, and I welcome your thoughts. >Steve >ICD/Your Move Chess and Games >www.ChessUSA.com
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.