practice error, "effect", not "affect"

On Practice - Blind Swine Mate #1, it says, "The name of this pattern was coined by Polish master Dawid Janowski, referring to coupled rooks on a player's 7th rank as swine. For this type of mate, the rooks on white's 7th rank can start out on any two of the files from a to e, and although black pawns are commonly present, they are not necessary to affect the mate." ( lichess.org/practice/checkmates/checkmate-patterns-i/fE4k21MW/WjhSQVDH )

This should be, "...they are not necessary to EFFECT the mate." "Effect" as a verb, means to create , or to cause to come into being. "Effect" is the perfect word in this case. "Affect" is just wrong.

PS This is my first comment here, I think. I hope I'm not adding this in the wrong place or seen as being argumentative. I just found a mistake.

Affect:
verb
to have an effect on; make a difference to.

I agree that effect would be better. A different way to explain it would be:
A synonym for effect is achieve.
A synonym for affect is influence.
The pawns aren't necessary to achieve the mate. Therefor they aren't necessary to effect the mate.

If one is determined to use affect, one could say that the pawns' presence doesn't affect the mate, since they don't influence the mate.
The "necessary to" part makes effect better.

To me, switching to achieve seems like better communication, unless your intended audience is native English speakers over 15 years old or so. Typical little kids in my region don't know the verb form of effect, though some do

Both "Affect" and "Effect" are verbs. (though "Effect" is usually used as a noun)

"Affect" v - To make a difference to.

"Effect" v - To bring about, or to cause to happen.

In this case, "Effect" is the correct word, as OP says.

its supposed to be "affect"
@danegraphics "effect" isn't correct because i think the author meant that the pawns don't help get the checkmate, not bring or cause the checkmate
"effect" is more widely used as a noun
"affect" is mostly used as a verb

and im sure the Lichess moderator/whoever wrote that is smart, so he/she would've wrote "effect" instead of "affect"
in addition, if this is an error, how come no one else has complained about it since the Blind Swine 1 Checkmate was created?

edit: i think i lost this argument

@InkyDarkBird
"its supposed to be "affect""
You're no idiot, and yet you made two mistakes in the first short word in a post about accuracy! It's not easy to be correct all the time, and many people either lack the English skills to recognise the fact that this is a mistake, or can't be bothered to try and get it corrected.

Effect is obviously the correct word, because "...although black pawns are commonly present, they are not necessary to affect the mate" doesn't make any sense. Pieces are either involved in the checkmate, or they are not.

""effect" is more widely used as a noun"
Other uses of a word are entirely irrelevant to the discussion of this use of the word here. Set usually refers to a collection but that doesn't stop it being the correct word to describe jelly going from a liquid to a more solid state, or where a fox lives.

""affect" is mostly used as a verb"
Like it is here, except it's the wrong verb.

I'll try again:
The pawns aren't necessary to ____ the mate.
We are ____-ing the mate with or without those pawns.
The mate is being effected, ie brought about.
The mate isn't being affected, or changed.

@InkyDarkBird your comment reminds me of a joke.

Two economists are walking down the street. One looks down at a $100 bill lying on the sidewalk, and says, "Look! Someone dropped a $100 bill!"

The other economist replies, "Nonsense. If there was a $100 bill lying on the sidewalk, someone would have picked it up."

@gregconquest is correct that "affect" is wrong, but I think "effect" isn't much better; the sentence is needlessly opaque. My suggestion is: "...and although black pawns are commonly present, they aren't necessary."

@UncleVinny
It's not at all opaque, just as long as you know that "effect" means "cause (something) to happen; bring about.". You can rewrite any sentence 100 different ways; if you're going to be reading/writing English you need to know a few words. This isn't xkcd.com/thing-explainer/.

@Doofenshmirtz

Claiming it's "not at all opaque" is one toke over the line.

Most native English speakers get "affect" and "effect" confused, even if they know that less-common definition of "effect" -- as evidenced by the author getting it wrong!

Because the page is meant to be instructive, and many lichess members aren't native English speakers, it makes sense to keep the text as simple as possible, i.e., not "needlessly opaque".