From zefrank

Voting CLOSED (fxe4 wins)

Current Tally

Nf6 2 votes

fxe4 11 votes

Rf6 5 votes

Qg6 3 votes

11 votes divided by 18 voters equals 61% support.

Today's Suggested Moves have been posted, and the voting polls will open at Friday 7PM EDT and close at Monday 12AM EDT(Sunday night), in order to give time for enough deliberation before the votes are cast. Don't have a username/Id yet? Get one here! and take some credit for your contributions!

Remember to check back even if you've already cast your vote! .. there's still some disagreement between potential moves .. and analysis will most likely continue up until Sunday night when the polls close. It's also not too late to submit a vote for another move that has not been evaluated yet .. (although it looks like we have most of the best move options available, people can always miss things).

• (very) Rough draft of the Fabuloso Chess Edit Guide is now up and located here

Use the following tags to help suggest moves, and remember if you want to throw up an example speculative board in the discussion, please refer to the Edit Guide on how to properly format it.

 <!-- ==Speculative Move== -->

 <!-- REMOVE THIS LINE TO INSERT BOARD

  REMOVE THIS LINE TO INSERT BOARD -->

 <!-- MAKE CERTAIN YOU ADD A COMMENT TO JUSTIFY THIS POSITION-->

{{clear}}

Just follow the instructions, and completely delete those lines .. and don't forget to replace 'Speculative Move' with the actual move name. Also bear in mind that anything after the clear tag won't be visible, so don't enter any text underneath it (unless you're adding another section)

Voting Instructions

Cut and paste the following to vote

# '''VOTE''' by ~~~~: add a comment! 

• You may vote for many moves as you like, but only one vote per move.
• When voting closes, the move with the most votes wins.
• If there is a tie, whoever tallies the votes breaks the tie.

Vote for or against anti-voting

... it seemed that it was overwhelming (15-2) that fabulosos didn't like this idea, i've moved it to the article section so that if anyone wants to look at it, they can. otherwise, i thought there was no need to clutter the page. mayorcj^SR 12:50, 29 July 2006 (PDT)

Actually it was either 15 - 0 or 15 - 1, I anti-voted for anti-voting. Since the result means my vote doesnt exist, I suspect it was 15 - 1. Not that it's really relevant. I was just amused at myself, that's all. I'll go over to that corner and giggle. 203.28.159.168 12:04, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

For the record, I thought your anti-vote was pretty funny. PTWhipplebang 12:47, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

i saw your antivote, i just refused to acknowledge that it exsisted.... wait, wouldn't it be 16-1? oh my... all these numbers... i need something to drink 68.238.11.207 17:13, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

Waiting on Ze's move

You know, even before this happened I thought that to be fair we should allow him until Saturday to post the weekend move. He's been giving us an extra day per week to think about things. (bobbie_mac...not signing in)

Formatting idea

This may be the wrong place to put this, but I thought that it might help people to add a section above the current move proposals that discusses the implications of Ze's last move. A lot of this seems to happen within the move proposals, but it might help to start a thread so that people bopping onto the page at 11:30 PM can see where the major threats are and get an easily perusable debriefing on what we need to respond to and what defensive holes have been opened up by Ze's play. I get a feeling people sometimes see the page and then make a decision based on what has the most votes or the longest thread, which could turn the tide against a good move if a few people do this early (ex. what was once a 3 to 1 vote might jump to 15 to 1 for no reason in particular). I don't know how big of a problem this is, but it seems like it would keep people better informed at the very least. Just a thought for consideration. Ess 09:01, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

• Makes sense to me, although I think that's what the "Strategy Discussion" is supposed to be (not that it really gets used that way). PTWhipplebang 09:54, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

A plea

Guys, can we please get rid of the right to vote on multiple moves? That just doesn't make any sense to me and its devaluing the collaboration here. In chess you have to make *one* move. We should each be able to decide which move is the best and vote for it. What we have here now is a loosey-goosey analysis in which people say "I like move A" and then later say "but I guess move B is okay, too. They're both fine. Hey, move C is cool, too!" That's a very casual analysis of a chess position and is not how you should be analyzing your own games you play. Since neither move A or B or C is backed with much conviction, it makes it harder to uncover the strategic theme for the position. Snark 12:12, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

We already discussed this at length and voted on it.

--Jeff 12:51, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

I know we did but I think the practice has shown itself to be a bad idea. Thus I'm asking for a reconsideration. Snark 13:34, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

Snark, most positions can have more than one viable plan. While there may be one move I consider vastly superior to another, I can still say that the plan in question has some merit. By voting for it as well as the move I consider superior, I increase the possibility that the winning move is one I do in fact support in some fashion. When there's only one move I can support, I only vote once. It increases, not decreases collaboration -- and in fact can be shown that in multicadidate races, multiple votes increases the chance that a good candidate is elected over a poor one. 70.97.22.122 18:36, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

The point is not to maximize the chance that a move we individually vote for gets picked; it's to maximize the chance that we collectively pick the best move. Allowing multiple voting reduces the deterministic likelihood of that happening. This is not an election where so long as we get a "good" candidate we're happy. We want the best one. (This is also not a blind election; it's an election where we each get to see everyone else's votes before we place our own.) If we have an advantage in a given chess position, like we do now, then it's likely the case that there are many moves that are "good," or at least not "bad". But the whole point of strong chess is to find the best move, one that follows a strategic plan from move to move. Suppose we have three suggested moves, for instance, and we take multiple voting to its ultimate conclusion: suppose that each gets the same number of votes because everyone agrees "they're each playable." Then our collective choice is essentially random, unless a crank like me refuses to go along with multiple votes and picks one particular move. And, by the way, that makes us cranks very powerful. When many people are multi-voting, that increases the value of the singular voting indviduals. Another reason to dump the system. Snark 19:44, 30 July 2006 (PDT)

No one said that you need to vote for a move just because it's "playable". In fact I specifically didn't vote for Rf6 this round because I felt fxe4 was superior even though I could tell Rf6 was still a winning move. But suppose we had single voting and f4 had garnered a bit of support. We could be in the position where 4 strong players liked fxe4 and 5 other strong players liked Rf6 but 6 or 7 weaker players went along with f4. At some point the people preferring fxe4 would have to give up on what are sure is the best move and switch to Rf6 to avoid disaster. This means constantly monitoring the board and also making politicial calculations and a lot of extra effort. Jeff 08:20, 31 July 2006 (PDT)

Boy, I wish the people who voted for Nader in 2000 had paid that close of attention. Or that we DID have multi-voting then. :-) 68.43.125.79 08:28, 31 July 2006 (PDT)

Strategy Discussion

Contents 1 Voting CLOSED (fxe4 wins) 1.1 Current Tally 1.2 Voting Instructions 1.3 Vote for or against anti-voting 1.4 Waiting on Ze's move 1.5 Formatting idea 1.6 A plea 2 Strategy Discussion 3 Suggested Move Summary 3.1 Nf6 3.1.1 Voting 3.2 fxe4 3.2.1 Voting 3.3 Rf6 3.3.1 Voting 3.4 f4 3.4.1 f4 showdown 3.4.2 comments 3.4.3 Alternate for Otis 3.4.4 comments 3.5 Qg6 3.5.1 Voting

The Predictions are now moot. I put them in the magic dumpster. PTWhipplebang 06:52, 29 July 2006 (PDT)

Suggested Move Summary

Suggested Position Suggested Move: Rf6	Suggested Position Suggested Move: f4	Suggested Position Suggested Move: fxe4
Suggested Position Suggested Move: Nf6	Suggested Position Suggested Move: Qg6

Nf6