30 May 07
Originally posted by coquetteyou do realize that 36 days is a finite number, and that people who are abusing the system will eventually run out of time?
Slow play is fine. That's part of accepting the conditions of play. This thread is about having a vacation flag on (preventing a time out loss) while still making moves in lots of games.
I believe that adding 36 days of additional time bank for everyone was not the original intention of creating the vacation rule.
We can simply stop now and agree that ...[text shortened]... r opponents until you remove your vacation flag.
It's too clear and simple, isn't it?
You would want to force no moves at all for anyone on vacation based on a few users who didn't move in your games? You only want this rule to spite a few users you feel should have been moving in your games, I can't see any other reasoning for this.
You are not speeding up play, you are trying to make it so no one can move when on vacation.
You've also warned that many people are going to leave a correspondence chess site due to the time controls? Are you privy to information to back up this, or are you making sweeping statements to add affect?
P-
30 May 07
Originally posted by RagnorakNope wrong again.
So what you're saying is that you want more free games, so that you can start another game while your opponent is on holiday, so that you don't "get bored and resign".
Gotcha.
You should have said so in the beginning, in which case I would have recommended that you subscribe because when you have unlimited games, you're not going to get "bored and resign" if a beaten opponent doesn't move for 2 weeks.
D
I have repeatedly stated that I do not want more anything except fairness in the games I play.
I would willingly be restricted to four or even three games max if no vacations were to be used in them.
Why should anyone be allowed to buy more timebank- it's ridiculous and you know it.
And as you will have discovered in this thread, I have my own No Vacation policy so it doesn't directly affect me.
30 May 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitOh gee, sorry, 36 is a finite number? Had me fooled. Well, that clears it all up.
you do realize that 36 days is a finite number, and that people who are abusing the system will eventually run out of time?
You would want to force no moves at all for anyone on vacation based on a few users who didn't move in your games? You only want this rule to spite a few users you feel should have been moving in your games, I can't see any other ...[text shortened]... vy to information to back up this, or are you making sweeping statements to add affect?
P-
I think there are more than just a few users moving while on vacation.
I wasn't really bothered at all by it when I first noticed it. It was no big deal to me at all. Then I realized how much longer the clan matches and tournaments will be.
Okay, I do admit to being irritated by having a player sit on a lost position with the vacation flag up on one game while making moves in another game. My weakness.
However, having said all that, I would like to be clear about this: I am not motivated by spite. My recommendation is to improve the enjoyment of RHP because I really like to play chess.
I don't recall warning about anyone leaving RHP. I asked if anyone would question that people have left RHP due to slow play manipulators. I don't have any substantiation for this and I asked that no one respond to the question because it was rhetorical. I understand that not everyone understood the meaning.
Frankly, it's ok the way it is. I enjoy chess and RHP is really cool. I was only trying to make a suggestion that would improve RHP. You are free to disagree with my suggestion.
31 May 07
Originally posted by coquetteI think you need to read what you wrote at the bottom of the last page. You give a great warning, and you also go "factoid" on us with your final statement.
Oh gee, sorry, 36 is a finite number? Had me fooled. Well, that clears it all up.
I think there are more than just a few users moving while on vacation.
I wasn't really bothered at all by it when I first noticed it. It was no big deal to me at all. Then I realized how much longer the clan matches and tournaments will be.
Okay, I do admit to being i ...[text shortened]... ng to make a suggestion that would improve RHP. You are free to disagree with my suggestion.
Originally posted by coquette
It's too clear and simple, isn't it?
You want games to go faster, but you propose a rule that will only slow games down. You don't want anyone to move while on vacation like they are using vacation time as an extra bank of time.
So, you want to improve the site... I feel this rule change will. The only thing that has me questioning you is why you decide NO ONE can move on vacation? How will this speed it up?
So, tell me how slowing down vacationers is going to improve your enjoyment? I'm really confused about this if it's not just a spite thing for people using their 36 hours in your games while they moved in another.
P-
31 May 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitFair points.
I think you need to read what you wrote at the bottom of the last page. You give a great warning, and you also go "factoid" on us with your final statement.
Originally posted by coquette
[b]
It's too clear and simple, isn't it?
You want games to go faster, but you propose a rule that will only slow games down. You don't want anyone t ...[text shortened]... te thing for people using their 36 hours in your games while they moved in another.
P-[/b]
Unless I simply post a lot of games in real time so that you can see it for yourself, I'll just have to ask that you trust this:
Some players have had multiple clan match games and tournament games with me. Some of their positions have been dead lost. By that, I mean as soon as they make a forced move, they get mated. Other positions were competitive and either of us could have won. Here is what happened:
They sat on the move and get mated game/s and continued to make moves in the undecided games - all while their vacation flag was on, and their rate of moves was sometimes multiple times per day for several days in a row, sometimes losing and sometimes winning.
If you disagree about the impact that this "vacation" status play has on RHP, then that is fine. Factoid is a fancy word. It was yours, not mine. I simply stated (in the form of a question): "It's too simple and clear, isn't it?" Okay, apparently it wasn't clear or simple enough. Did this help?
31 May 07
Originally posted by coquetteLike I said, I know all too well how some users stall a lost game. I'd need two hands to count the number of times I've said in the forums it is better to get the lost game finished and move on, but users still think it's best to stall the game out. I know... I know.
Fair points.
Unless I simply post a lot of games in real time so that you can see it for yourself, I'll just have to ask that you trust this:
Some players have had multiple clan match games and tournament games with me. Some of their positions have been dead lost. By that, I mean as soon as they make a forced move, they get mated. Other positions were ...[text shortened]... and clear, isn't it?" Okay, apparently it wasn't clear or simple enough. Did this help?
How is this sealed move thing going to fix that is my question? Now no one can move on vacation, the people who keep moving in your games included.
Let's say you don't like people with bad haircuts. You see lots of them, and it bothers you. Granted, not everyone has a bad haircut... but you decide to cut everyone's head off anyway just to ensure you don't see anymore bad haircuts.
I don't know how else to put this, but you are trying to force everyone to stop just because a few people do something stupid. How is this a solution to your particular problem? Are you going to feel better because no one can move on vacation... or are you going to come back and complain that no one is moving at all anymore and everyone's got full clocks when getting back from vacation?
P-
31 May 07
Originally posted by coquette"I believe that adding 36 days of additional time bank for everyone was not the original intention of creating the vacation rule."
Slow play is fine. That's part of accepting the conditions of play. This thread is about having a vacation flag on (preventing a time out loss) while still making moves in lots of games.
I believe that adding 36 days of additional time bank for everyone was not the original intention of creating the vacation rule.
We can simply stop now and agree that ...[text shortened]... r opponents until you remove your vacation flag.
It's too clear and simple, isn't it?
-You believe this in defiance of Russ' statements when he introduced the system.
"We can simply stop now and agree that everyone gets 36 days of protected time bank each year to be used at their discretion and in any way that they like. This would close the issue."
-Amen.
"Again, and this is quite circular, so I do apologize, the "so what" to this is the slowing effect on the hundreds of games that are affected."
-You're pointing out here that your "new and improved" vacation system will slow down the games, whereas the current system doesn't?
Why are you so desperate to slow things to a crawl?
Read Russ' explanation in the thread that I linked to earlier. I don't think he once stated that the Timeout Immunity could only be used if a flight has been taken. The loosely titled Vacation System, should probably be renamed "Timeout Immunity". Would that make you happier?
D
31 May 07
We had a discussion about vacation abuse a while ago and the difference betwen 'abuse' and 'use'.
A whole Thread 69307 is about a case of abuse of the vacation system in a 1/0 tournament.
31 May 07
Originally posted by coquetteWhy? You can have an infinite number of other games going. If an opponent is stalling on a lost game, but goes on to win, 10 others in the mean time, then you have just gained extra rating points?
Okay, I do admit to being irritated by having a player sit on a lost position with the vacation flag up on one game while making moves in another game. My weakness.
As for your interpretation of what the Vacation System is for, here is Russ' announcement (including clarifications in brackets from me)
"1) Players on vacation (from the site) and their opponents can continue to move. It is only protection from timeout for a fixed number of days, nothing more.
2) A player must clear down games at risk from timeout before their vacation (from the site) ends. Removal of the vacation flag will end any protection. The vacation (from the site) page help will be updated to make this clear.
3) People can use their days as they please.
-Russ"
D
31 May 07
Originally posted by FabianFnasWhy are you still using the word "abuse" when people use their Timeout Immunity Period © "as they please".
We had a discussion about vacation abuse a while ago and the difference betwen 'abuse' and 'use'.
A whole Thread 69307 is about a case of abuse of the vacation system in a 1/0 tournament.
Please see Russ' point 3 above ("3) People can use their days as they please. "😉, and use the word "use" in place of "abuse" in future discussions about the vacation system.
Thanks,
D
31 May 07
Originally posted by RagnorakNo no, I'm just refering to a thread where other people use the word 'abuse'.
Why are you still using the word "abuse" when people use their Timeout Immunity Period © "as they please".
Please see Russ' point 3 above ("[b]3) People can use their days as they please. "😉, and use the word "use" in place of "abuse" in future discussions about the vacation system.
Thanks,
D[/b]
Perhaps they just abuse the word itself 🙂 I don't know.
31 May 07
Okay. I give up. We agree to disagree. It was just a suggestion. I promise not to care.
P.S. I'll bet someone else sometime off in the near future starts a similar thread all over again with the same arguments recycled.
P.S. P.S. I don't mean I'll really bet. It's just a figure of speech. (I added this because of all the linguistics police that lurk in these threads)
31 May 07
Originally posted by coquetteWhat don't we agree on? I just want you to explain HOW this will solve your problem. I think you're having trouble doing that, because you know it won't. It's a great rule for me, but considering your complaint about slow play, it is NOT a good rule for you.
Okay. I give up. We agree to disagree. It was just a suggestion. I promise not to care.
P.S. I'll bet someone else sometime off in the near future starts a similar thread all over again with the same arguments recycled.
P.S. P.S. I don't mean I'll really bet. It's just a figure of speech. (I added this because of all the linguistics police that lurk in these threads)
P-
31 May 07
Originally posted by PhlabibitJust when I think I'm out, they suck me back in!
What don't we agree on? I just want you to explain HOW this will solve your problem. I think you're having trouble doing that, because you know it won't. It's a great rule for me, but considering your complaint about slow play, it is NOT a good rule for you.
P-
Okay. My suggestion was totally lame. It would have the opposite effect than I suggested. It would do more harm than good. Play would get slower rather than longer. Absolutely. There is no point to changing.
😛😉😲