[bena]

The bulk of the post is a description of the new rules with a small anecdote about why they were created.

It seems like the intention of the article was to share the rules. As such, we should be able to discuss those rules. And this person would like to know the reasoning behind the rules as that does give insight. Maybe the rule is counter to the actual goal of the rule and would be better served by another rule. Or to get rid of it entirely.

Because even chess hasn't always been chess. Chess has been developed over years and settled into its state after a lot of refinements.

"It's for fun" is a thought terminating phrase.