I've been a CVP contributor for quite a few years. H.G., please be a little bit kinder. If I may though, I'll repeat something I mentioned elsewhere. You, H.G., do not (as is stated elsewhere) have any responsibility for the actual approval (regardless of speediness) of publication of any item on CVP site. You've (as is also stated elsewhere) modestly denied yourself that particular honor. You do, though, Comment (even heavily, at times) about any members' submission awaiting for possible approval by editor(s) who do in fact have that honor. However, as I alluded to elsewhere, your Comments about aspiring authors' items (that are as yet to be published on CVP site) seem more often harshly critical, rather than nearly as often giving even minor praise (or leniency, i.e. at least refraining from commenting, when there might be reasonable doubt), it seems to me, though I am not certain of how to weigh all of that.
Your not being eligible to approve for publication an item on CVP site might be something Fergus may have overlooked, in stating his two points about possible reasons as to why at times submissions in waiting are not published as yet, H.G. Either that, or Fergus himself did not emphasize enough to me (or to other potential contributors who were viewing a given Comment of his, way back in time) much earlier that he absolutely agreed with you, H.G., i.e. many months earlier, that my waiting submissions at the front of my 'pipeline'. That is, if Fergus agreed with you much earlier, months ago, that they (i.e. my submissions at the front end of my pipeline) must first have diagrams using SVG set figurines to have any hope to be published, at all, rather than (in my case, besides those of any other possibly affected aspiring items' authors, I guess) my using certain set(s) I may prefer to choose. As it happens, the diagrams were in fact already done by me, in all cases, and did I chose such set(s) that could well be deemed unsightly by comparison to SVG ones. Thus I may well be (yet again) S.O.L., to some degree, in terms of my personal luck on CVP site as an aspiring author of a given item. That could well be the case for all of my (9) submissions waiting in the front of my 'pipeline' (though just for starters), as in all of my submissions diagrams I happened to choose set(s) that could well be deemed unsightly by comparison to SVG set(s).
Note however that at this time it is still not 100% clear to me that Fergus is dogmatically requiring that preference of SVG sets over certain set(s) be absolute for a contributor to follow as a rule, as an all-but yet to be rubber-stamped official policy for CVP site (most notably of me, for starters). In any case it was not clear to me, which, if any, editor(s), were assigned to examine some/(all of) my (9) submissions waiting for approval. That is, I did not know who were the assigned editor(s), if any, on my 9 cases, in each of those long months I waited (at times I visited this CVP site less than hour, and less than every day of a given week, I admit). I was not being a smart-aleck in waiting during those months, in fact. I had something like a then horrifically hectic life to live, often complicated, and even literally painful at times, as unforeseen events arose in it. Pretty busy, anyway. In some ways my life is still all of that, to a degree.
Also, H.G., you commented something to Aurelian, whom I may have gotten back to myself eventually by way of a reply (albeit which might then, I still fear - as if my being once bitten, twice shy - by way of chance events, somehow spiral out of control by way of unforeseeable ramifications developing on CVP site alone, such as exchanges of Comments on CVP site, in a long-drawn out manner like the present discussion has, with the final number of posters involved being unknowable, too - I hope I can soon set such fears aside, when I have more time to spare, beyond participating in this thread alone). Anyway, H.G., in your Comment that I am replying to, you wrote to Aurelian to the effect that (more specifically than before, in a reply of yours to me), just some (i.e. certain sub-groups!?) of my (9, for starters[!?]) submissions might, just might, be 'cloned' together, rather than your earlier apparently (though I am going by recent memory alone) rather sweeping generalization (it seemed to me) about why don't I just clone them all (first 9 in my 'pipeline', for starters[!?]) as if all 9 (for starters) together.
If my memory serves more or less correctly in that regard, that in fact may be indicative of a tendency you seem to have, that I think I have discerned now and then, over the years, though my opinion is of course subjective, and in my case I admit I may not have all the relevant instances (or read carefully enough in places, at times) to fully back up my observation. Anyway, the tendency I feel I have observed, over the course of years (though it's good advice, I have learned, not to generalize too frequently - marriages and friendships can be weakened, if not destroyed, by such a thing) is that now and then you (and this seems applicable to Fergus, too) have 'moved the goalposts', in regards to your Comments (and/or standards that are expected of others to notice/follow, in Fergus' case) on this CVP website; such movements of said goalposts, as I perceive them to be, are at times breathtaking to me (though that may not quite be the best way in general to describe them, in the case of some such movements I myself learned of, at a particular moment).
Maybe it's just me (noting first I could be especially prone to feel any grief that is a result, my often not keeping up with the latest hardware/software/internet developments - that is, sometimes I feel marginalized, similar to, perhaps, at least some who lack in health, wealth, literacy, etc., in any particular walk of modern life), but it seems many a time that around the very time I want to get some submissions published (I've been a CVP member since 2015), some general contributors' requirement(s) for CVP have very recently changed, or happen to change while any of my submissions (if not all) are still waiting in my own 'pipeline'. That's just my bad luck, I thought, as every instance of policy change(s)/additions, that I had no inkling about, arose. On top of that, there were (at times overlapping) instances of, say, new Diagram Designer features, or a relatively recently prominently[?] displayed 'Tools' list of Menu options to click on (such as for making Interactive Diagrams) being perfected right around such time(s) I made a 'batch', of the at the least several submissions, that I more or less submitted about at the same time, in such cases as if my habit, perhaps.
Then, at times the CVP site crashed on a regular basis, though the last case of it that I knew, vaguely as a memory, was quite a few years ago, to add to any misfortune I may have had, in even beginning the process of posting to CVP site, for editor(s) to examine, just one submission I had ready on my drawing board, though I assume that was both my bad luck, as well as everyone's misfortune (to a lesser or greater degree). Not even counting any unforeseen minor/major glitches re: affecting albeit temporarily how fully functional CVP site was, that happened over the years at times. Though that's perhaps just long ago since the last case I might vaguely recall, that sort of thing just might (possibly heavily) delay some/any one's hopes of publishing item(s), alone.
That's another reason to publish items swiftly after minimal editor(s) due diligence, as a rule for CVP editor(s), lest some potential gem of an as yet unpublished CV invention not see much light of day, indefinitely. I'd note that's opposed to a seemingly significant number of apparently outright howlers that I've seen that are denoted as CV inventions - though I may be biased, as a chess master - that seem to sail right through to publication on CVP site, since I first joined as a member here in 2015, as if in such cases of swift publication of such howlers, it is perhaps mostly due to their being invented by an aspiring author on CVP who happened to have especially good skills/stamina applicable to CVP site.
Again, as I noted elsewhere, perhaps there's reason(s) why the number of CVP members who post on the site, or play on Game Courier, on a regular basis, seems to me to be steadily dwindling (may be an inaccurate description of the decline, for those who care about it). I now offer one analogy, to start with, that may be applicable and or useful, to illustrate one of the possible reasons I alluded to here and there in my previous paragraphs (or perhaps posts, in case[s]): my father as a rule tries to stay away from stores that have their aisles radically re-arranged, especially if far too frequently, in regards to where any particular kind of merchandise is to be found. Never mind his attitude about malls that are sort of like a game of Snakes And Ladders, in terms of how to access a given store (on a given floor) that could be reached in a far more direct manner, instead of the allowed choices of routes in terms of the escalators, stairways or elevators that are on offer. Plus, don't get he or I started on stores that are similarly tedious to navigate, as though trying to get through a maze with only one solution, like the IKEA chain of stores, it seems as a rule, last time I went through one such store - perhaps the case for IKEA stores worldwide[?].
Contrary to some of H.G.'s earlier assertions, note I am objecting (though so far it's just for the time being, or maybe the foreseeable future, that I balk), re: the notion of my re-touching all 9+6=15 my submissions (15x2 in a way, roughly, if to count possibly re-touching my Settings Files for them, if it is required later that they look the same way as their rules pages' diagrams, if such pages are ever published), on more consideration(s)/principles than he may have more fully worked out, or perhaps even imagined, concerning where I am coming from. As an aside, I am trying my best to ignore my somewhat high blood pressure (as I imagine it to be), while trying to imagine various sides of this 'debate' re: CVP editorial policy, and more, in this thread.
As a second, somewhat more lengthy, aside, bear in mind that I do care (at least at present, still) about the welfare of this CVP site, and CVs in general, and such altruistic considerations/principles weigh in significantly enough, in my thought of (at least at this time) not quite yet caving in. That is, to whatever further sort of arm-twisting, etc., that might possibly arise in this thread alone - or, alternatively, I may begin to think of my visiting CVP site less often each week, and perhaps only briefly so on a given day, for at least a while. I am relatively new in learning the possible effects on someone who is increasingly advanced in age, in person. Also bear in mind I (albeit mostly long ago) volunteered to serve in three governance bodies/levels of rated organized chess in Canada, sometimes three at once. Thus, I am not altogether unfamiliar with the concept of being altruistic and thoughtful, in regard to at least giving some input concerning how to try to further popularize a given CV. Albeit, that's just for the single CV I then concentrated on (i.e. FIDE Chess, itself), and mainly concerning possibly increasing the frequency with which it is played over-the-board, and/or written about, in a national, provincial or regional setting, in a perhaps fairly typical nation on earth in many respects, as perhaps Canada is. Plus, I am not altogether unfamiliar with the need, and performance, of sheer hard 'grunt' work, when justified, at least when I was significantly younger/healthier.
Getting back to what was a major thought in my second last paragraph, of my all but vehemently objecting in general re: re-entering things for a given item by an aspiring author, due to what I dub as 'nitpicking', at best, by way of any CVP editorial policy (or even by possible subjective views held by CVP editor(s)). Again, a very relevant example is the so far depressing/nightmarish case (as I see it personally, anyhow) of my, at present, as yet unpublished submissions, still in my personal 'pipeline', the last time that I looked. That's while the possibly(?) still not yet settled critical issue, that's hanging over me like a big and dark cloud, may continue to remain a topic for editor(s)' discussions that are on and off, concerning SVG sets being absolutely preferred to certain piece sets (among them unfortunately may be ones I happily chose 'big time', long ago) that are not SVG sets. If I ultimately feel a need to re-enter FEN fields for many items (or even Settings Files) of mine, I could indeed do that (albeit with a somewhat crestfallen look on my face, perhaps).
It goes against what was formerly a relatively minor principle of mine I did not stick to often enough in the past, i.e. to try to not give in too much too often, perhaps even if to mollify those members who might nitpick any time later, after an item of mine had even been already published long ago, at least if it was over something that seemed trivial to me, such as only concerning my diagram(s) involved. Such giving in a bit much at times may well still continue for me all the same, maybe especially if rules pages I make were to be published expeditiously, never mind the relative few members who might nitpick at best, in my view, in a possibly vociferous manner, even perhaps a.s.a.p. as a rule for them, i.e. prior to publication, if ever, of a given item of mine.
Anyway, in fact I have given in, big time, in what seems a lot of cases in hindsight, over the years, to what I see as 'nitpicking', at best, even if I know my efforts to re-touch such items of mine will be quite time consuming for me, even before I begin to re-touch any given item still unpublished. That trend, in my case, kind of kept going over those years, to my seemingly unending frustration, with my being all but forced to comply (lest I risk wasting the time I invested up until then, in working on any given item earlier) over the years to make time to do such what I see as nitpicking stuff, at best, that eats away at my free time, and perhaps that of others who normally take little pleasure in that sort of stuff too (if any doubt, by 'others' I mean just applying to the aspiring authors, of the items).
In the event that my waiting submissions are expeditiously published as they are, intact, that is without any re-touching by me, I can do such re-touching later, say, oh, a year from now or less, even, when my personal life may be significantly less complicated, in spite of the absence of any faith whatsoever, of my ever possibly doing such re-touching (that is, if left until after such a happy event, for me, as the expedited publication of all my CVs as they stand right at this time, on CVP site) of any published stuff of mine, that you, H.G. are presently displaying with such emphasis. Anyway, for now at least, give me a bit of a break, such as from talk that I may be a bit too lazy.
Another anecdote: when on a chess message board, I once learned of a chess master out west who in a relatively low level chess tourney replied to the first move (i.e4) by White (by a much lower rated opponent) by offering a draw as Black, which was quickly accepted. Said chess master was steamed just by being paired against that opponent in the final round, but the tournament director was unyielding to the requests of the master to change the pairing. So, to sort of protest at the pairing, the master offered the draw, as I related. Anyway, references about that act of protest somehow made their way around Canadian chess message boards in short order. At one point, on one such message board, I wrote a somewhat bland post re: my disapproval of that master's way of making a 'protest'. That master eventually saw my post on that Canadian chess message board, and titled his reply directed at me as something like: 'Blah-Blah-Blah'. Well, to make a long story short, my reply to that reply of his was to include the phrase 'You showed your true colours'. He apparently didn't like that part, and titled his reply, to my own latest one, by the words 'True Colours', and then... well, at least we both knew where we were coming from. So, I tried at first being faultlessly civil on that chess message board, as far as my original post's entire tone went, but that master was apparently not in any way impressed. That's a possible lesson that I just may have to re-learn, apparently, even on this CVP site, at least now and then. Once again, H.G., I respect your skills, altruism and work-ethic, nonetheless (similarly so, for Fergus). Note though that in a Comment much earlier, elsewhere, H.G., you opined to me that I gave a rant in a Comment of mine that you replied to. I didn't think so, at all. Well, I think I showed you just now what a possible rant of mine (at least at some points in this Comment, if not all of it) might look like, in the form of a typed Comment on CVP site, albeit I think I am relatively a novice, concerning the art of ranting, either spoken or written. Good night, H.G. (and Fergus).
Look, H.G. (and Fergus),
I've been a CVP contributor for quite a few years. H.G., please be a little bit kinder. If I may though, I'll repeat something I mentioned elsewhere. You, H.G., do not (as is stated elsewhere) have any responsibility for the actual approval (regardless of speediness) of publication of any item on CVP site. You've (as is also stated elsewhere) modestly denied yourself that particular honor. You do, though, Comment (even heavily, at times) about any members' submission awaiting for possible approval by editor(s) who do in fact have that honor. However, as I alluded to elsewhere, your Comments about aspiring authors' items (that are as yet to be published on CVP site) seem more often harshly critical, rather than nearly as often giving even minor praise (or leniency, i.e. at least refraining from commenting, when there might be reasonable doubt), it seems to me, though I am not certain of how to weigh all of that.
Your not being eligible to approve for publication an item on CVP site might be something Fergus may have overlooked, in stating his two points about possible reasons as to why at times submissions in waiting are not published as yet, H.G. Either that, or Fergus himself did not emphasize enough to me (or to other potential contributors who were viewing a given Comment of his, way back in time) much earlier that he absolutely agreed with you, H.G., i.e. many months earlier, that my waiting submissions at the front of my 'pipeline'. That is, if Fergus agreed with you much earlier, months ago, that they (i.e. my submissions at the front end of my pipeline) must first have diagrams using SVG set figurines to have any hope to be published, at all, rather than (in my case, besides those of any other possibly affected aspiring items' authors, I guess) my using certain set(s) I may prefer to choose. As it happens, the diagrams were in fact already done by me, in all cases, and did I chose such set(s) that could well be deemed unsightly by comparison to SVG ones. Thus I may well be (yet again) S.O.L., to some degree, in terms of my personal luck on CVP site as an aspiring author of a given item. That could well be the case for all of my (9) submissions waiting in the front of my 'pipeline' (though just for starters), as in all of my submissions diagrams I happened to choose set(s) that could well be deemed unsightly by comparison to SVG set(s).
Note however that at this time it is still not 100% clear to me that Fergus is dogmatically requiring that preference of SVG sets over certain set(s) be absolute for a contributor to follow as a rule, as an all-but yet to be rubber-stamped official policy for CVP site (most notably of me, for starters). In any case it was not clear to me, which, if any, editor(s), were assigned to examine some/(all of) my (9) submissions waiting for approval. That is, I did not know who were the assigned editor(s), if any, on my 9 cases, in each of those long months I waited (at times I visited this CVP site less than hour, and less than every day of a given week, I admit). I was not being a smart-aleck in waiting during those months, in fact. I had something like a then horrifically hectic life to live, often complicated, and even literally painful at times, as unforeseen events arose in it. Pretty busy, anyway. In some ways my life is still all of that, to a degree.
Also, H.G., you commented something to Aurelian, whom I may have gotten back to myself eventually by way of a reply (albeit which might then, I still fear - as if my being once bitten, twice shy - by way of chance events, somehow spiral out of control by way of unforeseeable ramifications developing on CVP site alone, such as exchanges of Comments on CVP site, in a long-drawn out manner like the present discussion has, with the final number of posters involved being unknowable, too - I hope I can soon set such fears aside, when I have more time to spare, beyond participating in this thread alone). Anyway, H.G., in your Comment that I am replying to, you wrote to Aurelian to the effect that (more specifically than before, in a reply of yours to me), just some (i.e. certain sub-groups!?) of my (9, for starters[!?]) submissions might, just might, be 'cloned' together, rather than your earlier apparently (though I am going by recent memory alone) rather sweeping generalization (it seemed to me) about why don't I just clone them all (first 9 in my 'pipeline', for starters[!?]) as if all 9 (for starters) together.
If my memory serves more or less correctly in that regard, that in fact may be indicative of a tendency you seem to have, that I think I have discerned now and then, over the years, though my opinion is of course subjective, and in my case I admit I may not have all the relevant instances (or read carefully enough in places, at times) to fully back up my observation. Anyway, the tendency I feel I have observed, over the course of years (though it's good advice, I have learned, not to generalize too frequently - marriages and friendships can be weakened, if not destroyed, by such a thing) is that now and then you (and this seems applicable to Fergus, too) have 'moved the goalposts', in regards to your Comments (and/or standards that are expected of others to notice/follow, in Fergus' case) on this CVP website; such movements of said goalposts, as I perceive them to be, are at times breathtaking to me (though that may not quite be the best way in general to describe them, in the case of some such movements I myself learned of, at a particular moment).
Maybe it's just me (noting first I could be especially prone to feel any grief that is a result, my often not keeping up with the latest hardware/software/internet developments - that is, sometimes I feel marginalized, similar to, perhaps, at least some who lack in health, wealth, literacy, etc., in any particular walk of modern life), but it seems many a time that around the very time I want to get some submissions published (I've been a CVP member since 2015), some general contributors' requirement(s) for CVP have very recently changed, or happen to change while any of my submissions (if not all) are still waiting in my own 'pipeline'. That's just my bad luck, I thought, as every instance of policy change(s)/additions, that I had no inkling about, arose. On top of that, there were (at times overlapping) instances of, say, new Diagram Designer features, or a relatively recently prominently[?] displayed 'Tools' list of Menu options to click on (such as for making Interactive Diagrams) being perfected right around such time(s) I made a 'batch', of the at the least several submissions, that I more or less submitted about at the same time, in such cases as if my habit, perhaps.
Then, at times the CVP site crashed on a regular basis, though the last case of it that I knew, vaguely as a memory, was quite a few years ago, to add to any misfortune I may have had, in even beginning the process of posting to CVP site, for editor(s) to examine, just one submission I had ready on my drawing board, though I assume that was both my bad luck, as well as everyone's misfortune (to a lesser or greater degree). Not even counting any unforeseen minor/major glitches re: affecting albeit temporarily how fully functional CVP site was, that happened over the years at times. Though that's perhaps just long ago since the last case I might vaguely recall, that sort of thing just might (possibly heavily) delay some/any one's hopes of publishing item(s), alone.
That's another reason to publish items swiftly after minimal editor(s) due diligence, as a rule for CVP editor(s), lest some potential gem of an as yet unpublished CV invention not see much light of day, indefinitely. I'd note that's opposed to a seemingly significant number of apparently outright howlers that I've seen that are denoted as CV inventions - though I may be biased, as a chess master - that seem to sail right through to publication on CVP site, since I first joined as a member here in 2015, as if in such cases of swift publication of such howlers, it is perhaps mostly due to their being invented by an aspiring author on CVP who happened to have especially good skills/stamina applicable to CVP site.
Again, as I noted elsewhere, perhaps there's reason(s) why the number of CVP members who post on the site, or play on Game Courier, on a regular basis, seems to me to be steadily dwindling (may be an inaccurate description of the decline, for those who care about it). I now offer one analogy, to start with, that may be applicable and or useful, to illustrate one of the possible reasons I alluded to here and there in my previous paragraphs (or perhaps posts, in case[s]): my father as a rule tries to stay away from stores that have their aisles radically re-arranged, especially if far too frequently, in regards to where any particular kind of merchandise is to be found. Never mind his attitude about malls that are sort of like a game of Snakes And Ladders, in terms of how to access a given store (on a given floor) that could be reached in a far more direct manner, instead of the allowed choices of routes in terms of the escalators, stairways or elevators that are on offer. Plus, don't get he or I started on stores that are similarly tedious to navigate, as though trying to get through a maze with only one solution, like the IKEA chain of stores, it seems as a rule, last time I went through one such store - perhaps the case for IKEA stores worldwide[?].
Contrary to some of H.G.'s earlier assertions, note I am objecting (though so far it's just for the time being, or maybe the foreseeable future, that I balk), re: the notion of my re-touching all 9+6=15 my submissions (15x2 in a way, roughly, if to count possibly re-touching my Settings Files for them, if it is required later that they look the same way as their rules pages' diagrams, if such pages are ever published), on more consideration(s)/principles than he may have more fully worked out, or perhaps even imagined, concerning where I am coming from. As an aside, I am trying my best to ignore my somewhat high blood pressure (as I imagine it to be), while trying to imagine various sides of this 'debate' re: CVP editorial policy, and more, in this thread.
As a second, somewhat more lengthy, aside, bear in mind that I do care (at least at present, still) about the welfare of this CVP site, and CVs in general, and such altruistic considerations/principles weigh in significantly enough, in my thought of (at least at this time) not quite yet caving in. That is, to whatever further sort of arm-twisting, etc., that might possibly arise in this thread alone - or, alternatively, I may begin to think of my visiting CVP site less often each week, and perhaps only briefly so on a given day, for at least a while. I am relatively new in learning the possible effects on someone who is increasingly advanced in age, in person. Also bear in mind I (albeit mostly long ago) volunteered to serve in three governance bodies/levels of rated organized chess in Canada, sometimes three at once. Thus, I am not altogether unfamiliar with the concept of being altruistic and thoughtful, in regard to at least giving some input concerning how to try to further popularize a given CV. Albeit, that's just for the single CV I then concentrated on (i.e. FIDE Chess, itself), and mainly concerning possibly increasing the frequency with which it is played over-the-board, and/or written about, in a national, provincial or regional setting, in a perhaps fairly typical nation on earth in many respects, as perhaps Canada is. Plus, I am not altogether unfamiliar with the need, and performance, of sheer hard 'grunt' work, when justified, at least when I was significantly younger/healthier.
Getting back to what was a major thought in my second last paragraph, of my all but vehemently objecting in general re: re-entering things for a given item by an aspiring author, due to what I dub as 'nitpicking', at best, by way of any CVP editorial policy (or even by possible subjective views held by CVP editor(s)). Again, a very relevant example is the so far depressing/nightmarish case (as I see it personally, anyhow) of my, at present, as yet unpublished submissions, still in my personal 'pipeline', the last time that I looked. That's while the possibly(?) still not yet settled critical issue, that's hanging over me like a big and dark cloud, may continue to remain a topic for editor(s)' discussions that are on and off, concerning SVG sets being absolutely preferred to certain piece sets (among them unfortunately may be ones I happily chose 'big time', long ago) that are not SVG sets. If I ultimately feel a need to re-enter FEN fields for many items (or even Settings Files) of mine, I could indeed do that (albeit with a somewhat crestfallen look on my face, perhaps).
It goes against what was formerly a relatively minor principle of mine I did not stick to often enough in the past, i.e. to try to not give in too much too often, perhaps even if to mollify those members who might nitpick any time later, after an item of mine had even been already published long ago, at least if it was over something that seemed trivial to me, such as only concerning my diagram(s) involved. Such giving in a bit much at times may well still continue for me all the same, maybe especially if rules pages I make were to be published expeditiously, never mind the relative few members who might nitpick at best, in my view, in a possibly vociferous manner, even perhaps a.s.a.p. as a rule for them, i.e. prior to publication, if ever, of a given item of mine.
Anyway, in fact I have given in, big time, in what seems a lot of cases in hindsight, over the years, to what I see as 'nitpicking', at best, even if I know my efforts to re-touch such items of mine will be quite time consuming for me, even before I begin to re-touch any given item still unpublished. That trend, in my case, kind of kept going over those years, to my seemingly unending frustration, with my being all but forced to comply (lest I risk wasting the time I invested up until then, in working on any given item earlier) over the years to make time to do such what I see as nitpicking stuff, at best, that eats away at my free time, and perhaps that of others who normally take little pleasure in that sort of stuff too (if any doubt, by 'others' I mean just applying to the aspiring authors, of the items).
In the event that my waiting submissions are expeditiously published as they are, intact, that is without any re-touching by me, I can do such re-touching later, say, oh, a year from now or less, even, when my personal life may be significantly less complicated, in spite of the absence of any faith whatsoever, of my ever possibly doing such re-touching (that is, if left until after such a happy event, for me, as the expedited publication of all my CVs as they stand right at this time, on CVP site) of any published stuff of mine, that you, H.G. are presently displaying with such emphasis. Anyway, for now at least, give me a bit of a break, such as from talk that I may be a bit too lazy.
Another anecdote: when on a chess message board, I once learned of a chess master out west who in a relatively low level chess tourney replied to the first move (i.e4) by White (by a much lower rated opponent) by offering a draw as Black, which was quickly accepted. Said chess master was steamed just by being paired against that opponent in the final round, but the tournament director was unyielding to the requests of the master to change the pairing. So, to sort of protest at the pairing, the master offered the draw, as I related. Anyway, references about that act of protest somehow made their way around Canadian chess message boards in short order. At one point, on one such message board, I wrote a somewhat bland post re: my disapproval of that master's way of making a 'protest'. That master eventually saw my post on that Canadian chess message board, and titled his reply directed at me as something like: 'Blah-Blah-Blah'. Well, to make a long story short, my reply to that reply of his was to include the phrase 'You showed your true colours'. He apparently didn't like that part, and titled his reply, to my own latest one, by the words 'True Colours', and then... well, at least we both knew where we were coming from. So, I tried at first being faultlessly civil on that chess message board, as far as my original post's entire tone went, but that master was apparently not in any way impressed. That's a possible lesson that I just may have to re-learn, apparently, even on this CVP site, at least now and then. Once again, H.G., I respect your skills, altruism and work-ethic, nonetheless (similarly so, for Fergus). Note though that in a Comment much earlier, elsewhere, H.G., you opined to me that I gave a rant in a Comment of mine that you replied to. I didn't think so, at all. Well, I think I showed you just now what a possible rant of mine (at least at some points in this Comment, if not all of it) might look like, in the form of a typed Comment on CVP site, albeit I think I am relatively a novice, concerning the art of ranting, either spoken or written. Good night, H.G. (and Fergus).
Regards, KP