Comments/Ratings for a Single Item

Hi Bn Em

Yes, I see your points, but all the same please publish the four as they are, and then you (or possibly other editor(s)) can check the remaining 3 - if subsequent editor(s) are different for the remaining 3 then I'll have to consider their judgement(s) from scratch, even if it affects all 7 all over again.

Regards, Kevin Pacey

I did notice some 3 English 'words' in 1 that are nouns that Gilman coined, especially in his second section with words beginning with C (towards the end of that section).

You mean the likes of ‘Coviewingspot’/‘Cowingnut’/‘Coworkload’? Maybe I'm counting differently (I wouldn't tend to count prefixes like ‘co‐’ which are part of most names on that page specifically, otherwise ‘Antidisestablishmentarianism’ (at least 6 segments — and in fact a noun!) would carry precedent; hence I wouldn't really consider ‘counterclockwise’ an example either) but I still only consider those two‐part compounds at heart. Which leaves the likes of ‘Coupandup’ which might be the only true 3‐part compound (plus suffix for 4) on the page as far as I could tell, but still isn't really a noun as such. And really shows the desperation of finding unique names for such a wide range of pieces (and in particular the many possible 3D leaper compounds which are unlikely to see practical use)

Please let me know sooner or later if I should do name editing all the same

If you've since found a name you like acceptably well in comparison to WMW that'd probably be best; if you still strongly prefer WMW I'll leave it at that and publish at least those four (and the others, failing some other major oversight)

@ Bn Em:

A search I did just now for English words that are 3 words within one notably gave 'counterclockwise' (not a noun) and also somehow 'sunflower' made it to the list, but I think that must be an error. So, no nouns on one search result I got from Google.

I checked my list of unpublished submissions pending, and by my count I would have 5+2=7 I'd need to change to some degree (plus 2 settings files that would need to be copied with new names, a little more modified, then the original settings files could be deleted by Fergus later). Still a bit of trouble for just one tentatively unpopular piece type name choice.

In the M & B Articles of CVP site, I did notice some 3 English 'words' in 1 that are nouns that Gilman coined, especially in his second section with words beginning with C (towards the end of that section). I have yet to glance at his remaining sections (except for 'W', in case Gilman used warmachinewazir himself).

Please let me know sooner or later if I should do name editing all the same (unless you publish the 7 submissions without much delay, at least starting with the 4 submissions that are still under your personal review, it seems; note that this evening I've put 3 more submissions under review, and they all have the warmachinewazir piece type within).

Whilst I'm not as hardline as Jean‐Louis regarding ‘Aanca’ (for better or worse, it did build up a small history of use for W‐then‐B and imo at least in the context of variants from that time retains a little validity), I fail to see the wisdom in compounding the confusion (especially with an already‐controversial name) by assigning it to yet a third (especially so closely‐related) piece. If not ‘Godzilla’ for Gryphon+Rhino, there's always Gilmanese ‘Gorgon’ (used also by Frolov)

That works for me. I'll go edit that note presently.

And once again... I'm dropping Aanka.

@ Bn Em

I'd forgotten I'd used Wazaba in 4 Kings Quasi-Shatranj (already published long ago), but I guess my feeling on that word changed later, when what I thought was something I preferred more came to my attention (i.e. Warmachinewazir).

It's a similar story with my long published Sac Chess CV, where I used 'Judge' instead of Centaur (subsequently I've sometimes, but fully aware, used the latter, i.e. when I am not inventing a CV that I see as a spinoff of Sac Chess). Unlike Jean-Louis I don't feel I need to always use the same name for pieces when they are in different CV inventions of mine.

I don't go as far as Seirawan and Harper, when they even named a Chancellor piece an Elephant (for their S-Chess invention), which I think may fly in the face of common CV convention for that animal.

Anyway, aside from now disliking Wazaba a bit, and liking Warmachinewazir a lot ('Battletank' is a single word noun that can be found online nowadays, if a precedent is wanted outside of [CVP published] Gilman), my biggest issue is that I would have to redo/undo a number of waiting submissions[5+2=7]/(settings files[2]), especially over a matter that seems arbitrary/debatable (and just a single name). Right now I don't always have a lot of stamina for such depressing re-tracing of my steps, though I do admire those with the energy/youth to keep doing it over and over again without even a whimper. :)

@Kevin:

I'd missed/forgotten that particular objection to Wazaba/Wazbaba, and I do agree that if you don't like it then you ought to be free to not use it (though my search for the ⟨Wazaba⟩ form did turn up your own 4 Kings Quasi-Shatranj, for what it's worth). Though for what it's worth, alternative piece names for Orthochess pieces rarely become less idiomatic English, and as H.G. notes it's not the proliferation of names as such that's the issue here

I think there were only four games (the four I left, for now, unpublished: Accelerated and Unaccelerated Constabulary/‐ble Chess/‐spiel) using this name, and only once each; the WMW Chess/‐spiel setting files are of course more unfortunate OK never mind, I forgot about WIP's, but even there besides the WMW games the only other usage seems to be in Bureau‐Spiel, so only 5 mentions total excluding eponymous games

I'm fairly sure the sometimes awkward names of some more obscure pieces are part of what turned people off M&B (though even then, under C I only spot Canvalander, Cardirider/‐lander/‐runner (of which the first as Cardinalrider is relatively uncontroversial), a couple of Camel‐ pieces (all relatively obscure), and Cbehemoth/Cbuffoon/Cmutilator for (cool but almost wilfully awfully‐named) Brook‐style pieces — more than average, sure, but he names more pieces at all than average and most of these are fairly obscure, used only by himself if at all). The criticism applies validly there too (with different mitigating factors)

Most 3‐word compounds in English (‘whatsoëver’, ‘notwithstanding’, ‘albeit’, ‘inasmuch’, ⁊c.) tend not to be nouns ;‌) Or much of anything except moderately obscure grammatical particles. And nor is it a productive way of producing new words; they're all lexical fossils of sorts

In any case I personally won't insist too hard on the name; it's clunky, and in apparently the majority opinion unnecessarily so, but you seem to be very keen to keep it for whatever reason and ultimately the freedom to pick names (at least up to generating confusion) does stand

@H.G.:

Wazbaba is Gilman's spelling; I'd never noticed that most others uses lack the first b (and had thus assumed Haru's was a typo). As a wazir–dabbaba portmanteau I definitely prefer it with both ⟨b⟩s myself

@Bob:

Whilst I'm not as hardline as Jean‐Louis regarding ‘Aanca’ (for better or worse, it did build up a small history of use for W‐then‐B and imo at least in the context of variants from that time retains a little validity), I fail to see the wisdom in compounding the confusion (especially with an already‐controversial name) by assigning it to yet a third (especially so closely‐related) piece. If not ‘Godzilla’ for Gryphon+Rhino, there's always Gilmanese ‘Gorgon’ (used also by Frolov)

@Jean‐Louis:

I think Betza's error in Bent Sliders was not so much one of interpretation as one of judgment ;‌) He knew perfectly well it was “Spanish for [the piece with English name] Gryphon”

@Bob: "for your own part"? I don't know where you got that. I never saw this. I have seen "Godzilla" as compound of W-R and F-R. Here by Ivan Derzhanski.

I got it from combining the historical version with the (multilply repeated) erroneous version. You haven't seen this, because the only page I have it on is still Private (and probably will be for some time). And I'm very resistant to recognizing the name of a Copyrighted/Trademarked character as the "conventional" name for a piece.*

But I say "for my own part" because I don't expect anyone (at all) to follow along.

*Except, of course, when the piece predates the character, or the name is arrived at another way. Since the word gojira was literally coined for the first movie, the piece was clearly named for the character.

I quoted Bn Em's spelling ('Wazbaba') without checking if it needed correcting - evidently the error propagated from there.

On a personal note, my life will get a little busier soon, especially if I am lucky on the part-time employment front, so my CV contributing/commenting hobby may need to wait/(slow down) for a bit, or at least be less regular for a while. Then, there is getting a tooth yanked, perhaps this summer...

@Bob: "for your own part"? I don't know where you got that. I never saw this. I have seen "Godzilla" as compound of W-R and F-R. Here by Ivan Derzhanski.

About the discussion on Aanca, if you search a litlle bit you will find, even on this site, for example just on our last month recognized game. Aanca is the word in medieval Spanish used to describe the anqa, a giant eagle preying elephants from the Persian tales, in the Libro de los juegos (1273), for Grant Acedrex, playing as F-R.

Murray (History of Chess, 1913) translated Aanca by Gryphon (which is not exactly the same monster), hence the name used by most chess variant lovers.

Betza made a mistake by misunderstanding Murray and called Aanca the W-R, not the F-R.

Aanca=Anqa=Gryphon as much as Rey=King, Peon=Pawn, Torre=Rook.

We do have a large choice of other names for W-R so there is no need to employ a word which results from a mistake.

I have seen the WD being called Wazaba, never Wazbaba.

The case which upsets me is Aanka used for W-then-B. But I will stop saying it. Now everyone knows this story and may decide whether it is a good idea or not to use this name. I am tired to argue with those who are purposely not understanding. They can call Aanka what they want, and why not call the Rook an Obispo if they like.

A fuller discussion would be better served elsewhere, but for my own part the Aanca is both W-B and F-R -- the compound of Manticore and Griffin.

Furthermore, I currently don't like the sound of Wazbaba somehow - call it a quirk of mine.

That's probably the most compelling reason of all to not use that name. (And remember, I happen to like the name quite a bit.)

My idea: because you call FA the Modern Elephant, I call WD the Modern Dabbaba, or better Modern War Machine.

I'm very tempted to call it a Washer/Dryer.

Concerning WD I call it War Machine, or simply Machine. Several decades ago (I'm a veteran), I was calling it War Machine as it is to the Dabbaba the same thing that (my) Elephant is to the Alfil (the translation vs the old Arabic word). Some are saying "Modern Elephant" to be explicit, so I would agree with Lev to say "Modern War Machine" or simply Modern Machine.

I think most of us can agree in principle that Modern War Machine can be conisdered the "conventional" name for the piece, even if other names are used to fit various themes and tastes. Even so, for this game, as much as I'd prefer to see it be the Wazbaba or MWM, I think Kevin's justified in leaving it as it is if he really, really wants to.

@Kevin: you say "Even Jean-Louis has written an inventor can feel free to choose their own names (at least when he does not mind too much :) )"

Well, I understand I might appear a bit psychorigid sometimes. But I'm not, except for 1 case. I do think that an inventor may choose the names he wants. I also think that an inventor should, by respect, do a small effort to know what others have done. And take it or not, but with knowledge.

The case which upsets me is Aanka used for W-then-B. But I will stop saying it. Now everyone knows this story and may decide whether it is a good idea or not to use this name. I am tired to argue with those who are purposely not understanding. They can call Aanka what they want, and why not call the Rook an Obispo if they like.

Concerning WD I call it War Machine, or simply Machine. Several decades ago (I'm a veteran), I was calling it War Machine as it is to the Dabbaba the same thing that (my) Elephant is to the Alfil (the translation vs the old Arabic word). Some are saying "Modern Elephant" to be explicit, so I would agree with Lev to say "Modern War Machine" or simply Modern Machine. .

Well, I just looked at Gilman's Man & Beast series (in CVP Piece Articles), say under letter C, alone, for precedents for concatenated names of 2+ words into just 1 word, and the guy was a veritable fountain about coining them. That's just for CVs alone, nevermind in the English language (e.g. 'Whatsoever' is 3 words concatenated). So thanks Daniel, but I don't think I feel the need to change just yet.

Would warmachine-wazir work? Then you wouldn't have to change anything else.

Well, for starters, if I surrender on this minor issue, I'll need to ask Fergus to somehow re-name two Settings Files I have that have Warmachinewazir as part of their names. Then I'll have to re-submit the same Rules Pages for them. Just to begin with. A lot of fuss over something that in the early days of chess variants no one would have objected to, I'd think. Maybe there are fussier people these days.

Will I have to go through this kind of grief, a third or a fourth time, because of some minor/debatable thing again? Why am I being singled out on such a matter that's surely happened before?

I don't think you get this criticism because you chose an uncommon name. It is mostly because it is such an awful name, which looks very un-English in multiple ways. I don't think you would have gotten many complaints if you had called it a Falaffel.

My idea: because you call FA the Modern Elephant, I call WD the Modern Dabbaba, or better Modern War Machine.

Hmmm

Well, it'd take a long time, maybe, to rename/re-submit all the pieces/(new submissions) where I used Warmachinewazir (which I still think sounds like a cool name, personally). Are most editors/members so sure that such an arbitrary thing as a single name being in dispute is so intolerable? I'm sure this sort of thing has happened before, with few batting an eyelash. Is it just my bad luck that the things I do people notice while rubbing them wrong way?

Regarding why not Wazbaba, see my earlier reply to Haru in this thread, which went: "I can see your reasoning, Haru. A possible issue for me is that some of these unorthodox pieces have more names that were given to them over the years than some of the other types in the group. I wanted to use certain names, but Kirin has only one name as far as I know, and thus waffle gets thrown out with the bathwater, if phoenix must therefore be used (which H.G. for one may not mind, but I have a variant idea named Waffle-Spiel and Phoenix-Spiel somehow didn't appeal to me as much as a name, for example). It may also at times be certain name(s) don't appeal to someone, for whatever reason, and why should they be 'forced' to use them, if they are 'paired' by name with a piece that has a given name that that person doesn't mind the sound of, again for whatever reason?

edit: standard chess itself may have similar issues. 'Castle' is a popular nickname for rook (at least among novices), and similarly 'horse' for knight, 'cleric' or 'prelate' for bishop, 'lady' for queen (perhaps) and 'royal pieces' is a nickname sometimes used for king and queen as a pair. You also can have an issue building an opening repertoire, say with Black - you may want to play the Nimzo-Indian (just one choice) vs. 1.d4, but if White plays 3.Nf3 or 3.g3 then you have more than one choice against each of those, and you may dislike that there aren't more options vs 3.Nc3 than the Nimzo-Indian that you like to play. Also, you may like to play 3.g3 Bb4+, but not 3.Nf3 Bb4+, even though 'logic' may suggest one should be played if the other is."

P.S. to Bn: Even Jean-Louis has written an inventor can feel free to choose their own names (at least when he does not mind too much :) ).

Furthermore, I currently don't like the sound of Wazbaba somehow - call it a quirk of mine.

...maybe different for those who keep up records on what is the Queen's English, if it's still called that now that Charles is King.

It would now be the King's English. Queens English is now spoken mainly by Fran Drescher.

I can go for Wazbaba as a name. It's fun to say! :)

Reading over this again, I have to agree Warmachinewazir still sticks out as an incredibly clunky name; since you already have Ferfil for the piece whose image is named Elephantferz, why not the corresponding (albeit apparently thus far confined to Gilman) Wazbaba?

Now I think this rules page is ready for review.

I like very much the logic of adding those 4 pieces, FA, WD, FD, WA. My only problem is I don t know if I prefer the 8x10 or the 16x8. Maybe i should try playing both.