H. G. Muller wrote on Sun, Apr 1, 2018 08:09 AM UTC:
The way I see it is that the 'recognized' concept should mean "embraced by the World". I don't think it is a good idea to 'pollute' that by maintaining a category that only requires the game to be appreciated on this website.
There might very well be room for distinguishing games that have some special merit according to the community on this website, in addition to the favorites (which have as only disadvantage that it is not very clear, and in practice probably quite inhomogeneous, by what aspect they are judged). But I would prefer that to be independent of the 'recognized' title.
E.g. we could have an 'Ground-Breaking' award for variants that incorporate some innovative idea that works especially well. I am thinking of multi-path pieces in Falcon Chess, the sliding royal in Caissa Brittanica, total asymmetry in Spartan Chess. Variants that stick out from the "different board size, differently moving sliders and leapers" crowd.
The way I see it is that the 'recognized' concept should mean "embraced by the World". I don't think it is a good idea to 'pollute' that by maintaining a category that only requires the game to be appreciated on this website.
There might very well be room for distinguishing games that have some special merit according to the community on this website, in addition to the favorites (which have as only disadvantage that it is not very clear, and in practice probably quite inhomogeneous, by what aspect they are judged). But I would prefer that to be independent of the 'recognized' title.
E.g. we could have an 'Ground-Breaking' award for variants that incorporate some innovative idea that works especially well. I am thinking of multi-path pieces in Falcon Chess, the sliding royal in Caissa Brittanica, total asymmetry in Spartan Chess. Variants that stick out from the "different board size, differently moving sliders and leapers" crowd.