Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
If the community leaves "ChessUSA" then it is no longer under their control, i.e. it is not ChessUSA's decision at all!kinderchocolate wrote:No it's not. It's ChessUSA's decision. The forum is not owned by the community but by the sponsor who controls it and financially responsible for it.
The CCC was established to circumvent the problems of RGCC (flame wars, lack of moderation, etc.) Back then, hosting costed a lot, so Steven Schwartz, then owner of ChessUSA, offered to host it, just like some people offer to do it now (Peter, Joshua...). CCC was never meant to be the property of someone, so technically we should be free to move to a better solution when there's one. This being said, I think that ChessUSA has always stood to its part of the deal : hosting the forum and paying for the domain name, and never asked anything in return but to have its logo and its link on the top left corner. That was (and still is) a very honest deal for both parts.Sean Evans wrote:If the community leaves "ChessUSA" then it is no longer under their control, i.e. it is not ChessUSA's decision at all!kinderchocolate wrote:No it's not. It's ChessUSA's decision. The forum is not owned by the community but by the sponsor who controls it and financially responsible for it.
Cordially,
Sean
I might have missed the "drama" here previously (or the history) but why don't people migrate to open-chess instead?JuLieN wrote: No, the only problem is that we're stuck in the past with no way to update the software, and we can't carry on much longer this way. So it's definitely time to move on and seize Peter or Joshua's offer. And now that I think of it, the sponsoring could go on as well : Peter or Joshua would certainly be happy to, again, include ChessUSA's logo and link in the new forum in exchange for a little help for the costs.
Considering that Open-Chess was the result of a scission from Talkchess, created by people who left this community because they disagree with it, this proposition is a bit illogical, Martin.Martin Thoresen wrote:I might have missed the "drama" here previously (or the history) but why don't people migrate to open-chess instead?JuLieN wrote: No, the only problem is that we're stuck in the past with no way to update the software, and we can't carry on much longer this way. So it's definitely time to move on and seize Peter or Joshua's offer. And now that I think of it, the sponsoring could go on as well : Peter or Joshua would certainly be happy to, again, include ChessUSA's logo and link in the new forum in exchange for a little help for the costs.
There we have an owner who is active on adding features and updating the software.
The most annoying this with the software here on talkchess is the lack of an option of searching only in the titles imo.
Plus we don't want to lose our habits and content (this place is our home for our hobby, for us).
If I were to host the CCC, nothing would change, except who pays for the server. If ChessUSA still wanted the logo in the top left, then by all means they can have it.JuLieN wrote:Considering that Open-Chess was the result of a scission from Talkchess, created by people who left this community because they disagree with it, this proposition is a bit illogical, Martin.Martin Thoresen wrote:I might have missed the "drama" here previously (or the history) but why don't people migrate to open-chess instead?JuLieN wrote: No, the only problem is that we're stuck in the past with no way to update the software, and we can't carry on much longer this way. So it's definitely time to move on and seize Peter or Joshua's offer. And now that I think of it, the sponsoring could go on as well : Peter or Joshua would certainly be happy to, again, include ChessUSA's logo and link in the new forum in exchange for a little help for the costs.
There we have an owner who is active on adding features and updating the software.
The most annoying this with the software here on talkchess is the lack of an option of searching only in the titles imo.
The only thing we need is to update our software (and be able to do it as often as needed). Basically, it "only" means moving this forum's database to a server the admin has total access to.
Sounds wonderful!Peter Skinner wrote:(...)If I were to host the CCC, nothing would change, except who pays for the server. (...)
I asked Sam two days ago, in the mod sub forum, if, as an admin, he could retrieve the database, and what it would take to get the rights on the domain name transferred to the new host, but Sam hasn't replied yet. I guess we have to wait for Sam's answer.Steve Maughan wrote:Hi Peter,Sounds wonderful!Peter Skinner wrote:(...)If I were to host the CCC, nothing would change, except who pays for the server. (...)
What do we need to do to make this happen?
Steve
P.S. I'd be happy to contribute to a hosting fund
Can I suggest ChessUSA remains the owner of the domain and simply changes the domain's Name Server to point to the new host.JuLieN wrote:(...)what it would take to get the rights on the domain name transferred to the new host(...)
Sounds like a good idea. And it'll probably keep ChessUSA's logo on top left corner.Steve Maughan wrote:Hi Julien,Can I suggest ChessUSA remains the owner of the domain and simply changes the domain's Name Server to point to the new host.JuLieN wrote:(...)what it would take to get the rights on the domain name transferred to the new host(...)
This will be quicker than transferring the domain. It may also reassure others that if the new arrangement goes horribly wrong (which I don't think it will) the domain can simply be pointed to another host i.e. the person hosting the domain does not have ultimate power.
Steve
JuLieN wrote: So it's definitely time to move on and seize Peter or Joshua's offer. And now that I think of it, the sponsoring could go on as well : Peter or Joshua would certainly be happy to, again, include ChessUSA's logo and link in the new forum in exchange for a little help for the costs.
