[Retros] rights & ocassions / not answering Andrew anymore

[Nicolas Dupont]

Dear Andrey,

> As soon as we enact any basic principles governing the application
> of rules and conventions in fairy chess composition, someone will come
> up (like Nicolas did) with a new fairy type rendering these principles
> meaningless.

This is true, but I don't think this is a reason to don't try to list  
some general principles governing fairy chess, to put some order in  
this field, say.

As an example I'm working to classify series genres (I expect an  
article will be published on this matter). There are 4 of them that I  
call "classical", the well-known direct, help and self, and a fourth  
one, less known "auto-self", where black is playing all the series and  
is obliged to reach the goal at its last move.

It provides an harmonious picture which don't embrace all existing  
series types, like help-self, which is not "classical", as not of the  
form "monocolor set of moves + 1 terminal move".

So while it is certainly impossible to precisely define what a fairy  
genre is, it is certainly possible to define what a "classical fairy  
genre" is, putting in it some clear-cut axioms, for example what are  
the possible moves of a white pawn standing on the first row (I listed  
5 different kind of rules governing those delocalized pawns, a nice  
way to discourage newcomers...).

Best,

Nicolas.