15 Mar 06
4 edits
Originally posted by leisurelyslothI was going to suggest something like that too. You basically have the option of choosing the current method or this idea when creating a new game.
Why not make it a user selectable feature (like timeout and timebank)? When you create a new game, you'd just select a timebank regeneration factor ( 0 - 100% ).
Different users prefers different functionalities and that's normal.
This is similar to the new boards design. Thread 39678. As you can see, the preferences of users differs.
It is possible for this site to implemented both functionalities. I do not why you have to argue.
15 Mar 06
Originally posted by pointThat's the point.
Now if you find you're someone who goes on vacation all the time, or maybe leave the site for days at a time, maybe you should only play games with a bigger timebank. The site provides a timebank of 28 days, will this not accommodate you?
1 vacation a year in a 3/7 game can (and does) lead to a mass of timeouts, which can (and does) generate a lot of bad feeling ("I had vacation flag up, and I was still TO'd by ****ers"😉.
By being able to increase your timebank by increasing your rate of play, the onus is on the vacationer to generate enough timebank to get them through their vacation/business trip. If they don't do that, then they haven't made the effort to cover themselves, so the TO would be more justified (as viewed by the people who currently feel hard done by when they get TO'd while their vacation flag is up.)
nishzone, you're a non-subscriber, and as such, most of your games are generated through open invites. Subs generally get the majority of the games through tournaments and clan games. In this case, you can't customise the game settings.
Personally, I think I've only ever been TO'd in 2 games. Its just I've seen a lot of people posting that they were angry with the way the vacation system works as it is.
D
30 Aug 06
1 edit
Bump.
I'm resurrecting this thread because I'm desperately hoping the Admins will this abandon this crazy 4 week vacation idea. There are far better ways to tackle this issue than taking a lowest common denominator approach.
In my view a game should have pre-arranged, re-agreed time controls. Its a contract. You break it, you lose.
When this vote gets enacted, anyone here can exhaust all their timout period, then all their timebank period, and then still waltz off on a four week holiday.
Well, I'm not sure I want to play under those conditions.
Sometimes democracy is not so smart, and this is one of those times.
Its like having a referendum on the abolition of taxes. Ooh! That sounds nice. But the implications have not been thought through.
31 Aug 06
Originally posted by Gatecrasheri agree with you ... the timebank is much better than some stupid vacation system.
Bump.
I'm resurrecting this thread because I'm desperately hoping the Admins will this abandon this crazy 4 week vacation idea. There are far better ways to tackle this issue than taking a lowest common denominator approach.
In my view a game should have pre-arranged, re-agreed time controls. Its a contract. You break it, you lose.
When this v ...[text shortened]... bolition of taxes. Ooh! That sounds nice. But the implications have not been thought through.
i think most people do not really appreciate what the timebank system offers.
31 Aug 06
Originally posted by flexmoreWhy can't we have a timebank AND a vacation bank, with stricter rules about how you can use the vacation bank?
i agree with you ... the timebank is much better than some stupid vacation system.
i think most people do not really appreciate what the timebank system offers.
And for people who don't want this, I picture a setting when starting a new game challenge:
Respect vacation bank? Yes / No
Some tournaments can respect vacation time. Others may not.
31 Aug 06
Originally posted by GatecrasherI initially voted with the 4 week vacation idea, but changed my vote having found this thread (glad you bumped it). I think this is a far better solution.
Bump.
I'm resurrecting this thread because I'm desperately hoping the Admins will this abandon this crazy 4 week vacation idea. There are far better ways to tackle this issue than taking a lowest common denominator approach.
In my view a game should have pre-arranged, re-agreed time controls. Its a contract. You break it, you lose.
When this v ...[text shortened]... bolition of taxes. Ooh! That sounds nice. But the implications have not been thought through.
01 Sep 06
3 edits
Originally posted by lauseyThe other thread in 'General' kind of slunk away to a mudfest, so I'll post another idea here.
I initially voted with the 4 week vacation idea, but changed my vote having found this thread (glad you bumped it). I think this is a far better solution.
I like the vacation immunity bank idea better, because what if you are on vacation just as a new round in a tournament starts? Your games could time out before you even have a chance to make a move! As well, a quick immunity ammendment for a couple of weeks would fit the current time scheme much easier. If you start messing with the basic time controls (time-out and timebank period), people are going to have to completely readjust.
Here's another idea for the vacation immunity slot idea:
You get 3 vacation immunity slots of maximum 7 days each. As soon as you throw your vacation flag up, whether you use 2 minutes or the full 7 days, one of your slots gets used up. You can raise and drop your flag as much as you want, but if you raise your flag, drop it, then raise it again, you use up two slots (14 days). It won't take long before you use up all of your vacation time if you try to abuse it. You can't make moves or view opponents moves while your flag is up.
I picked 7 days for a reason. The whole idea of the vacation immunity is that someone might need to be away from RHP for an extended period of time, so I think forcing people to take a whole week of their time will make them think first whether they really should raise their vacation flag or not. Someone who might be away for only 2 or 3 days, or be able to make occasional moves probably won't bother raising their flag.
01 Sep 06
One more thing, I object to the idea of a vacation immunity system replacing the timebank system, because it would then be basically the same thing but different. Lots of coding from R&C, and mental readjustment from the users of the site for essentially the same thing. Whatever new system is implemented should fit the current one as best as possible.
01 Sep 06
1 edit
Originally posted by bosintanglike many people, you seem not to fully grasp the beauty of timebank: you need to reconsider what timebank is ... it does cover this ... if the timebank is long enough to cover your vacation, then you just have to play regularly enought to be within your timeout after you return and you will be ok ... and the tourney will not be delayed.
..I like the vacation immunity bank idea better, because what if you are on vacation just as a new round in a tournament starts? Your games could time out before you even have a chance to make a move! ....
01 Sep 06
Originally posted by flexmore1/0 upto 3/7 tournaments do not currently allow leeway for a round starting as a player has just left on a 2 week holiday - as from 1 to 10 days into this period (+" for auto) the games would timeout, regardless of vacation flag.
like many people, you seem not to fully grasp the beauty of timebank: you need to reconsider what timebank is ... it does cover this ... if the timebank is long enough to cover your vacation, then you just have to play regularly enought to be within your timeout after you return and you will be ok ... and the tourney will not be delayed.
Neither would the player be able to increment their time before they went (as in this case they just left).
The vacation suggestion would accomodate this scenario, although this is about the only scenario I can think of right now.
The other problem with the quick incrementation of timebank pre holiday (as per GC's original posts) is that this requires the players opponent to be moving quickly too in the run up to the holiday (otherwise enough moves may not be possible to acrrue enough timebank).
01 Sep 06
2 edits
Originally posted by rhbGood points. There is no silver bullet. As long as we are going forwards and not going backwards from where we already are.
1/0 upto 3/7 tournaments do not currently allow leeway for a round starting as a player has just left on a 2 week holiday - as from 1 to 10 days into this period (+" for auto) the games would timeout, regardless of vacation flag.
Neither would the player be able to increment their time before they went (as in this case they just left).
The vacation suggest run up to the holiday (otherwise enough moves may not be possible to acrrue enough timebank).
As for the commencement of tournament rounds we could introduce a rule where the clock only counts against you after you have made your first move, or some preset time has elapsed, whichever is the soonest. This could be say 3 weeks (inclusive of timeout). In other words 3 weeks can elapse before a player is penalised (ie timebank erodes) for not starting a tournement game.
So a 3/7 tournament would effectively be a 21/7 for the first full move of the game.
This would also help in your final point. If you are about to go on holiday and a new tournament round starts, don't start playing till you get back.
01 Sep 06
3 edits
Originally posted by flexmoreDavid Tebb already covered this. Lets face it. Time managementis a huge part of chess. You can't think about playing chess without thinking about the time aspect of it. What if 90% of the time you are happy playing 1/3 or 3/7 games and you manage yoru time very well?
like many people, you seem not to fully grasp the beauty of timebank: you need to reconsider what timebank is ... it does cover this ...
*But -- there comes a time when you can't think of RHP or chess AT ALL, and that includes thinking about managing your chess time. You have business, family issues, health issues, whatever. You need to stop thinking about moving altogether! You need a short break from the internet. You need a short break from correspondence chess.
So you take a rare vacation time, now and then, up to 3-4 times a year totalling a max of 2-4 weeks -- and with the system I proposed, that's a very high ceiling. How much of an inconvienience would this be, when games go typically months, and tournaments go typically years anyways?
Again, who would be losing from this system? Is waiting an extra week or two really such a huge inconvienience when you enter a tournament that's going to take 2 years anyways?
01 Sep 06
3 edits
A whole list of non-subs here screaming about the sky falling. The way I see it, if there was an option when starting a challenge 'Respect vacation? yes / no', its a 100% non-issue for the people who like the tournament controls as they are. Non-subs don't compete in tournaments or clans, and they don't have games start automatically at inconvienent times for them.
The real problem with the time management as it is, is that games start automatically for people in tournaments (and maybe clans?), without their prior knowledge. Nobody can plan their vacation around a tournament round that may or may not start in a few months.
So if my vacation idea as proposed is not good, whatever 'solution' there is, should remember that the solution is to *this* problem.
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
01 Sep 06
Originally posted by bosintangI really like this idea.
Here's another idea for the vacation immunity slot idea:
You get 3 vacation immunity slots of maximum 7 days each. As soon as you throw your vacation flag up, whether you use 2 minutes or the full 7 days, one of your slots gets used up. You can raise and drop your flag as much as you want, but if you raise your flag, drop it, then raise it again, you ...[text shortened]... y 2 or 3 days, or be able to make occasional moves probably won't bother raising their flag.
Being forced to use several days at a time in one chunk, would prevent players from casually dipping into their vacation allowance, as if it was just another form of timebank.
Personally, I wouldn't mind if the chunks were a bit smaller. For instance a minimum of 4 days per use of the flag might be sufficient to deter abuse.
On the other hand, it could be argued that players should be allowed to do whatever they like with their vacation allowance. If they fritter it away in order to pointlessly delay a few games at the start of the year, they'll probably be punished for it by being timed out in other games later.
It would be interesting to hear the opinions of other people who are in favour of Vacation Immunity in principle, but wish to discuss the practicalities of its implementation.
I think you should post your suggestions in the thread in the General Forum so that they get more attention.
- Joined
- 07 Jun 05
- Moves
- 5301
02 Sep 06
1 edit
Originally posted by David TebbEdit: Forgot to write anything - it is early 🙂
I really like this idea.
Being forced to use several days at a time in one chunk, would prevent players from casually dipping into their vacation allowance, as if it was just another form of timebank.
[...]
It would be interesting to hear the opinions of other people who are in favour of Vacation Immunity in principle, but wish to discuss the pract ...[text shortened]... should post your suggestions in the thread in the General Forum so that they get more attention.
I like the idea of vacation in chunks, even down to a day - one of my opponents puts his vacation flag up every weekend. And why not - he'll be back on Monday, so it is a non issue. But counting days rather than minutes seems sensible.
Another idea which has been mentioned is blocking moves while on vacation. This seems necessary for the system to work. You can look at your games, post on forums, but not progress your games while on vacation.
In general I am in favour, but the details of the implementation may need another vote...
It would have been handy for things like my first banded tournament starting the weekend before I had 2 working weeks of business trips. Yes I could move at the weekend, and did, but it would have been much lower stress to have a break.
As for posting in the general forum, it took me 10 minutes to find the relavant thread last time I looked - I did not know the title, so scanning through them was hard. I expected "VOTE 12:blah", and scanned for that.
Gezza