On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 22:21:50 -0700 (PDT), Eli Kesef
<
nastyhorsefork@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thursday, March 24, 2022 at 12:54:06 AM UTC+2, Ken Blake wrote:
On Wed, 23 Mar 2022 14:26:36 -0700 (PDT), Eli Kesef
<nastyho...@gmail.com> wrote:
Bs"d
Let's be serious; when you look at a horse, do you see anywhere a knight?? >> >
NO!! What you see is a HORSE.
So let's call a spade a spade, and let's call a horse a horse.
It's a knight, not a horse. It doesn't matter what it looks like. It's
standard English name is "knight" and that's the name used by the vast
majority of English speaking chess players.
Bs"d
And that is exactly why we have to make a change. We cannot tolerate this wrong name to continue.
It's not a wrong name, and yes, we (all 99.something % of us) can
tolerate it. Almost everyone but you prefers to call it by its correct name--"knight."
*You* don't want to use it, and as I said, calling it a horse makes
you look like a silly nine-year-old beginner at chess.
I have to admit, though, that I think you play better than a
nine-year-old beginner does. I think I never played better than you do
until I was about 13 or 14.
We have to organize, and maybe start a NGO to promote our cause, to right a terrible wrong.
Feel free to start whatever you want. You might even find three or
four people willing to join you in it.
There may be an occasional player who calls it a "horse," but except
for young children and an occasional boob who foolishly wants to call
it by the wrong name, almost nobody does. I'd be amazed if as many as
1% of English speaking chess players who weren't complete beginners
called it a "horse."
The same goes for "rook." It's "rook," not "castle."
So you don't object when I say I do the long rooking?
I'm sure you know what my answer would be, so I won't reply to your
dumb question.
--
The real, original Ken Blake, not some other newcomer
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)