Single Comment

One of the features of multiform is that it can work productively with many
different minimalists and other groups. George, what are your criteria for
games that are sufficiently chesslike to be in contention? Does the board
size range from 8x8 to 10x10, or only 8x10? Must all the FIDE pieces be
maintained totally intact under any circumstances? Is there a minimum and
maximum number of pieces? Of pawns? I certainly have no objection to
discussing, assisting with, or designing some games under these
constraints; in a sense, it's a contest. Many of us like contests. Lay
out the rules, and some of us will enter.

In the wider sense, I've joked before that we are obscurely famous, known
by tens worldwide. How many people actually read this board? 10, 100, 1000,
10000? Or play? Heck, I included printable boards in my early games, and
even mediocre shatranj-type printable pieces along with the 8x10 and 10x10
boards in 'Two Large Shatranj Variants'. To my knowledge, 1 person has
used this; he printed a board after I told him it was there. I wish more
people would play these games; possibly when the world has more leisure
time, our creations will become more popular. Maybe as popular as
military-style board wargames were once. Maybe not. ;-) But whether any
game is a serious try at the next chess, a shatranj variant, or some giant
game with pieces that cover 10-20 squares each, I will treat them all the
same. Different perspective. 

To sum up: There is no problem with your 'two tracks' for game design,
and I will cheerfully do what I can to boost your 'inside track'. But
surely all designs need to be considered strictly as games in their own
terms, as well as being judged by a specific existing set of criteria...