1

So I noticed this question about the basic rules of chess has a (current) score of -3, but it has no close votes. I myself can't find an objective reason to close it based on the current standards.

Would it be good and on-topic to have a reference question on the essential rules of chess? How should we go about having an established question-and-answer?

Alternatively, do we expect that users coming to Chess.SE already have a basic understanding of chess rules?

0

2 Answers 2

1

So I noticed this question about the basic rules of chess has a (current) score of -3, but it has no close votes. I myself can't find an objective reason to close it based on the current standards.

I agree. I also can't find any objective reason to close it although I see that, perhaps based off this question, 3 people have voted to close it.

The reasons for downvoting a question are not the same as those for deleting it although clearly there is some correlation. If you hover over the down button the pop-up "This question does not show any research effort; it is unclear or not useful" appears but "not useful" is not one of the reasons to delete. Nor is "does not show any research effort".

Would it be good and on-topic to have a reference question on the essential rules of chess?

My initial reaction was that people who come here should already know how to play chess but then after reflection I changed my mind. We should be more welcoming.

1
  • 1
    the "more welcoming" nonsense has done irreparable damage to the entire SE network over the past six months or so
    – prusswan
    Feb 5, 2020 at 9:51
-2

Don't need one. This is not a place to teach people how to play the game from scratch. LQ questions draw in LQ users and LQ meta questions!

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .