Originally posted by Ragnorak
It's blatantly obvious that he misunderstands the concept of the current vacation system.
Pffft...
I understand it is abused, and I understand you are ...very blatantly ... defending the abuse by making whimsical excuses about why a system open to abuse shouldn't be changed.
The subject did not ask what alternatives are available...the subject was whether people agree that it is abused and if they consider it cheating....I have the answer now, so good luck with the rest of your ..."games".
Originally posted by ZadadkaCount your supporters... now go here:
Originally posted by Ragnorak
[b]It's blatantly obvious that he misunderstands the concept of the current vacation system.
Pffft...
I understand it is abused, and I understand you are ...very blatantly ... defending the abuse by making whimsical excuses about why a system open to abuse shouldn't be changed.
The subject did not ask what a ...[text shortened]... onsider it cheating....I have the answer now, so good luck with the rest of your ..."games".[/b]
http://www.timeforchess.com/vote/result.php?voteid=13
Just because you and a few vocal users want to call it cheating doesn't make it cheating. You want to punish EVERYONE because you FEEL that some users are abusing the system that quite frankly can't be abused.
So go enjoy your games.
Pffft, please.
P-
Originally posted by adramforall"How did you manage before the vacation system?"
How did you manage before the vacation system?
Did you feel you were forced to be online?
If not, what has changed?
If you did, why not just reduce your gameload/increase the timebanks?
.
I've always had a modest game load. I haven't had the need to use vacations but like it as an option.
"Did you feel you were forced to be online?"
I wasn't forced but wouldn't want to be put in a position of "feeling forced" as I dislike dropping games.
"If you did, why not just reduce your gameload/increase the timebanks?"
I can't control the timebanks on tournaments that I like to enter.
Ok, this has all got rather emotional & heated, to the extent that I (for example) insinuated Ragnorak was perhaps an abuser, and by virtue of my opening post, this might therefore suggest I'm saying he's a cheat.
That was not, in any way, shape or form, my intent, and I apologise unreservedly to Ragnorak and any other reader if this is how my comments were construed.
I extend that apology to anyone else who felt my Posts contained comments that may have seemed belittling or disparaging (Zebano, for instance, though most were, I regret, directed at Ragnorak).
I do understand the Vacation system, and such as it is, it's fine...but as even Zebano said : "You do have a point that some people abuse it insofar as they use it when not on vacation to gain time".
And THAT is specifically the issue I raised.
That the TimeOut Immunity abuse occurs in the manner Zebano describes, especially in tournaments, is not hotly disputed.
By extension, if such abuse gives an unfair advantage, then I suggest that it IS therefore cheating....but ...YMMV.
OK, so the Vacation system gives a user just so much such immunity, and then it runs out...but that's little solace for those who are "victims" along the way...cue the "there, there" comments 🙂
It's not about the points...as an average just-above-1200-er, I have no problems with losing games one after the other, and let's face it, gaining a TO over a player a couple of hundred (or more) above you brings only a brief smile as your points increase by a few dozen, since those points quickly evaporate to reflect your (ok, my) true level....there's no permanent advantage.
I enjoy playing chess, as do we all...but like all competitive games, the pleasure is greatly reduced when you experience something that smells like "cheating"...again, especially in tournaments.
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck......you know?
And so I asked the question of you, my Peers (and, indeed, my Betters).
I have no idea how best to deal with it, the 72 hours was a suggestion I floated which was quickly shot down in flames....with some good reasons (such as the Internet Cafe access)...which is fair enough...I asked for opinions.
I'm not looking to "impose my will", and I wouldn't ask for the site's dynamic to be compromised to stop me crying like a baby.
There may not be a currently usable solution to prevent this occurring...which is tough buns on me (and others)...but I do still feel a "tweak", particularly for tournaments, is called for...but again, YMMV.
Can we close this thread now?
I think its continuity will be largely fruitless, and I don't want to annoy anyone else 🙂
I now wish a more genuine Good Luck to all, and to Ragnorak : I still want a rematch.....BSG Fan...remember ? 🙂
Originally posted by ZadadkaThanks.
There may not be a currently usable solution to prevent this occurring...which is tough buns on me (and others)...but I do still feel a "tweak", particularly for tournaments, is called for...but again, YMMV.
I now wish a more genuine Good Luck to all, and to Ragnorak : I still want a rematch.....BSG Fan...remember ? 🙂
I agree that the current system isn't perfect, but it allows people who need timeout immunity for whatever reason to have it IMMEDIATELY. It also doesn't tell people that they can't access a site that they pay for for a certain number of days a year.
The solution, IMHO, is very simple, and doesn't require somebody to make all their moves before they can turn on their vacation, doesn't tell them what they can and can't do while on vacation, stops people from capitalising on their opponents ill-fortune (ie: timing out an opponent while on vacation), and it should stop nearly all complaints.
Add a further choice in creating open-invites/tournaments/clan games... Allow vacation: Yes/No.
All problems are solved, I should think. Having said that, if people don't understand that the current 35 days may be used as they please, then will people understand what this choice means?
Sorry, I don't remember. Who is BSG Fan?
[EDIT] I'm a non-sub, and don't have the Timeout Immunity facility.
D
'Welcome 🙂
Add a further choice in creating open-invites/tournaments/clan games... Allow vacation: Yes/No.
Top suggestion...that would certainly get my vote....obligatory in Tournaments?
Uh...I am....but I asked you if you were because Ragnor was a central feature in Series 1...you even asked what BSG was... I seem to recall you said you hadn't watched it at all...(BattleStar Galactica)
Never mind, it's not that important 🙂
Zad
Originally posted by ZadadkaI can't see it becoming obligatory in tournaments, but I can see there being tournaments created that specifically say "no vacation" etc..
'Welcome 🙂
[b]Add a further choice in creating open-invites/tournaments/clan games... Allow vacation: Yes/No.
Top suggestion...that would certainly get my vote....obligatory in Tournaments?
Uh...I am....but I asked you if you were because Ragnor was a central feature in Series 1...you even asked what BSG was... I seem to recall you said you ha ...[text shortened]... watched it at all...(BattleStar Galactica)
Never mind, it's not that important 🙂
Zad[/b]
I think with clan challenges it would be more trouble for the leaders to set up challenges. Some would be available for challenges, but only with vacation enabled.
I have no problem with having the option for open invites, but that's also a question of implementation.
The vacation system is no more abused than the normal move rules of the site are abused. In both cases it is by a minority of the userbase.
How many times do you have a decisive advantage, see your opponent has been online and is moving, but he doesn't move in your game until the move timer is about to expire?
By the logic of the whiners in this thread that is cheating, and the offender should be banned.
Guess what? Just because you don't like something doesn't automatically make it unjust.
The move rules and the vacation rules are the same for all users. You agree to them, in principal, each time you start a new game. So does your opponent. Since the playing field is the same for both parties, you both have the same options for your time.
OMG! Soandso was about to lose, but went on vacation and is still moving in his other games. We ought to ban him for abuse! Not because he is actually guilty of abuse, but rather because he is just annoying.
Now there is an idea. Ban annoying people.
Originally posted by ZadadkaFor the record, don't let 'heated' conversations online sweat you. We are all just trying to get our point across, and no one agrees on everything.
Ok, this has all got rather emotional & heated, to the extent that I (for example) insinuated Ragnorak was perhaps an abuser, and by virtue of my opening post, this might therefore suggest I'm saying he's a cheat.
That was not, in any way, shape or form, my intent, and I apologise unreservedly to Ragnorak and any other reader if this is how my comments we ...[text shortened]... all, and to Ragnorak : I still want a rematch.....BSG Fan...remember ? 🙂
The basics of my feelings on this subject is we are stuck with vacation. I voted against it. I don't feel I need 36 extra days, I plan all my games to give me 2 weeks any time I need it, and don't join tournaments I can't keep up with.
I'm not going to use my vacation to gain a time advantage in a quick match, but others are welcome to use their time that way if they like. You save your vacation time for the beach, and don't move if you don't want to. You are also welcome to do the same thing the other user is doing if you feel it's a great injustice. Save your vacation to punish users you feel are 'abusing' the system.
They really are not, they have their 36 days to use as they like. I personally prefer to spend them constructively to actually get away, but they have decided to use them as a small time cushion. Just remember they only get 36 days, and you could probably set your vacation for 7 days and take your time for a week while they burn their week. Everyone is welcome to move during vacation, and time banks still burn if you are not moving.
You can also just ignore them and play on at the designated time controls while they waste a 36 day period they could have used more constructively.
P-