05 Feb 10
Originally posted by Paul LeggettIf I missed a draw offer becaue of teh condition code mechanism, then I would be somewhat upset. Yes I know that there is an opton to tick, but anyway, a draw offer is too important to miss.
This is only true if they send a message. A draw offer made through the draw mechanism does not get logged. There actually is no record of a draw offer, unless it is accepted. The first time I asked the site administrators if there was a way, and they told me there was not.
It is true that you can't miss a message (with conditional moves, you actu ...[text shortened]... ve missed a message due to the conditional move), but this is not true for draw offers.
Paul
Same goes for messages. I don't like when I get a message and not have a chance to respond to it the next move. It could be taken as rude depending of the content of the message.
I would like that no conditionally move should be made if (1) a message is sent, and (2) when a draw is offered. I would like the cm chain to be halted and I respond manually in an appropriate way.
Okay, when I have the parole: I would like that a draw offer is documented in the PGN. The FIDE rules says that a draw offer has to be documented by the sign (=) in the protocoll, and I think this is a good idea.
05 Feb 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasI rec'd the post- this is a better statement than what I made. In my case, I should have automatically checked the box if I was prepared to accept a draw, but I like how you distilled it to the essence of communicating potentially critical information, and how that should trump conditionality.
If I missed a draw offer becaue of teh condition code mechanism, then I would be somewhat upset. Yes I know that there is an opton to tick, but anyway, a draw offer is too important to miss.
Same goes for messages. I don't like when I get a message and not have a chance to respond to it the next move. It could be taken as rude depending of the content of ...[text shortened]... w offer has to be documented by the sign (=) in the protocoll, and I think this is a good idea.
I think my narrow issue will disappear based on the good feedback in this post, but the broader issue is worthy of discussion.
Paul
05 Feb 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasKind of defeats the purpose of conditional moves.
I would like that no conditionally move should be made if (1) a message is sent, and (2) when a draw is offered. I would like the cm chain to be halted and I respond manually in an appropriate way.
Also what happens if you have logged conditional moves and each time your opponent either says hi, hello, how are you, nice move, etc, or even offers a draw every move?
Your conditional move is halted and you then have to make the move manually.
I think that would upset people more than the missing of a draw offer.
Just my 2p worth 🙂
05 Feb 10
Originally posted by adramforallThis would be considered bad etiquette...
Kind of defeats the purpose of conditional moves.
Also what happens if you have logged conditional moves and each time your opponent either says hi, hello, how are you, nice move, etc, or even offers a draw every move?
Your conditional move is halted and you then have to make the move manually.
I think that would upset people more than the missing of a draw offer.
Just my 2p worth 🙂
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by tomtom232I think there are a large number of people who would disagree with this statement, but it certainly clarifies in my mind why someone would be motivated to use a chess engine.
Chess is far from being about etiquette. Chess is about warfare and in warfare... anything goes.
06 Feb 10
1 edit
I would prefer not to have conditional moves halted by the opponent's draw offer. Either the position will still be drawn after the series, and another offer can be made, or someone will feel they have the advantage, and play on.
I would also prefer that the site not hide the fact that the moves are conditional, but trigger them right away. That way the opponent would know why the offer was refused.
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by SwissGambitBest answer I've heard yet! If the other person knows that a conditional move was triggered, I think that would solve the problem.
I would prefer not to have conditional moves halted by the opponent's draw offer. Either the position will still be drawn after the series, and another offer can be made, or someone will feel they have the advantage, and play on.
I would also prefer that the site not hide the fact that the moves are conditional, but trigger them right away. That way the opponent would know why the offer was refused.
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by tomtom232Chess is a sport for gentlemen. If etiquette is not there then the spirit of the chess is gone.
Chess is far from being about etiquette. Chess is about warfare and in warfare... anything goes.
I consider it bad etiquette when I get a draw offer in every move when my opponent is material under.
I consider it bad etiquette when my opponent constantly message me about how he wants me to play.
I consider it bad etiquette when my opponent is playing a totally lost game to its very end.
And I think everyone more or less agee with me.
So of course chess is more than mere warfare.
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by FabianFnasAnd nothing you mentioned is against the rules so whats your point?
Chess is a sport for gentlemen. If etiquette is not there then the spirit of the chess is gone.
I consider it bad etiquette when I get a draw offer in every move when my opponent is material under.
I consider it bad etiquette when my opponent constantly message me about how he wants me to play.
I consider it bad etiquette when my opponent is playing ...[text shortened]... And I think everyone more or less agee with me.
So of course chess is more than mere warfare.
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by tomtom232I believe I can answer this. There is nothing in the rules that says one must have good character to play, or which prevents people of bad character to play. His point is that there are more than just game rules which guide civil interactions. There are rules for the game itself, and then there are social expectations surrounding acceptable behavior. Although I should add that "anything goes" is certainly contrary to the rules, in letter and in spirit.
And nothing you mentioned is against the rules so whats your point?
Ultimately, these kinds of issues correct themselves, in that those who do not subscribe to the same ideas about conduct find themselves with fewer people with whom to play. When participation is selective and voluntary, water seeks its level.
Paul
06 Feb 10
Originally posted by Paul LeggettSo you're saying you don't see GMs breaking etiquette at major tourneys and matches? The psychological aspect is a big part of the game and if you're too stuck on etiquette you're going to end up butthurt. I just don't let anything within the rules bother me. In other words, schitt happens.
I believe I can answer this. There is nothing in the rules that says one must have good character to play, or which prevents people of bad character to play. His point is that there are more than just game rules which guide civil interactions. There are rules for the game itself, and then there are social expectations surrounding acceptable behavior. ...[text shortened]... whom to play. When participation is selective and voluntary, water seeks its level.
Paul