Single Comment

Gilman makes no mention of name of Omega inventor Gabriel Vicente Maura, although mentioning Duniho's name. [The Latin American Omega Chess is named two decades earlier than commercial Canadian Omega.] This BOC is stealing too much of Maura's concept in the core game Omega Chess from year 1974, although at least acknowledging it. Gilman's entire Rules section reads ''Rules, as Omega.'' That's it for the rules of ''Beyond Omega Chess.'' Inappropriate warping enlargement of Maura's game suitable only for a Comment under Maura's Omega by commonsense standards that would prevail away from CVPage. Beyond Omega is not being appropriate of separate write-up attributable to Gilman laying claim to be ''inventor.'' Gilman attempts rationalization defensively in his very first paragraph by citing Duniho's Storm the Ivory Tower. Copying as it does Smess, Storm the Ivory Tower is also unfortunate variety of self-acknowledged plagiarism. Sure there are fine lines. If either Beyond Omega or Storm the Ivory Tower were presented as satire or humour, they could be tolerable or acceptable. Instead, these ''artworks'' are shown by respective authors Gilman and Duniho as improvements of earlier products Omega and Smess. We now know there could be ''umpteen'' thousands of ''variants'' of any fundamental underlying Rules-set. Why not just put personal adaptations, intrinsically the same as prior art on some basic level, in Comment or two under the original work? Especially since they are not going to be played anyway. And even if having pretty good idea of one's own -- as Gilman has here with ''Alpha-Lambda'' representing ''incomplete'' Knight or Camel according to orientation. Sorry, Charles, it's not enough novelty, Gabriel got there first; and it is Maura's CV not Gilman's.