Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Help Forum

Help Forum

  1. Subscriber 1973mackem
    Keep The Faith
    11 Nov '06 10:57
    how long do you need to be inactive before being removed from redhotpawn, i quite often look at names to play then find they have never moved a piece for years? surely a move a year at least to show you still want to be on site.
  2. Subscriber Silverstriker
    DANGER MOUSE
    11 Nov '06 12:39
    Originally posted by 1973mackem
    how long do you need to be inactive before being removed from redhotpawn, i quite often look at names to play then find they have never moved a piece for years? surely a move a year at least to show you still want to be on site.
    when looking for players to play i suggest you use find player that gives you a list of all players that are online at the moment?
  3. Subscriber 1973mackem
    Keep The Faith
    11 Nov '06 12:44
    Surely the game will still be in player A's folder, if he really needs to check a game he played 2 years ago. By deleting someone inactive for 2 years would also free up space for others or improvements to the site, and save me challemnging someone to a game that may have died 2 years ago.
  4. Subscriber 1973mackem
    Keep The Faith
    11 Nov '06 12:50
    Thanks for the advise silver, i am new to the site and may be doing things arse about face. my original comment was just an observation and i did think a little about it sicilian thanks.
  5. Donation mwmiller
    RHP Member No. 16
    11 Nov '06 14:21 / 3 edits
    I think that when an account is created on this site it becomes a part of the database and all games are kept as part of that.

    Whether or not the member uses the account is up to them, but it is never removed.

    If the member is no longer using the account it still remains because their games are part of the site statistics and have an impact on their opponents' statistics as well.

    For example, if you go to the site map and look at the list of members who have been banned, you can still click on their name and see their game statistics. The member can not use the account in this case, but their game data is still intact. The same thing applies to inactive or abandoned accounts.
  6. Subscriber 1973mackem
    Keep The Faith
    11 Nov '06 16:11
    Okey Dokey everyone. Thanks for the info. i'm now happy and also convinced that not deleting people is good.
  7. Donation briancron
    nunquam perdo
    11 Nov '06 17:36
    I thought they would have cleaned out the old names too but I am very glad they did not.

    I first joined this site in Aug 2002 and I played for a good little while. Back then it was a free site and they didn't introduce subscriptions yet. You could donate money and become a "pawn star". You wouldn't have extra rights on the site but you could show your support. I did send money because the site was like nothing else around, and still is.

    I went away and got out of playing chess. Last month or so I started back playing and I was surpised that all I needed to do is get a password reminder and I was back in business.
  8. 11 Nov '06 18:21
    But inactivity should render loss of rating. Let's say one point for every inactive consecutive day after 30 days with no moves. Or something.
  9. Donation briancron
    nunquam perdo
    11 Nov '06 18:33 / 1 edit
    The problem with that is if someone was gone for 2 years they would lose 24 points, and that's no a big deal. So why bother scripting that?

    Second, if you made it a real punitive amount of points the returing player would make a new account instead of digging out the old one. Then, you get duplicate accounts.

    or, you get a 1600 level player rejoining with an 800 rating and joining banded tourneys
  10. 11 Nov '06 19:16
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    But inactivity should render loss of rating. Let's say one point for every inactive consecutive day after 30 days with no moves. Or something.
    Why?
  11. 11 Nov '06 20:47
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    Fisher has not the same ELO as he had in the former day because of inactivity. So inactivity renders degradation. Not my idea. Why not here?

    One point minus every day, starting after a month inactivity, makes 365 rating points less after a year. If a ten top player is inactive for a year he doesn't deserve being in the ten top players anymore. That's my opinion.
  12. 11 Nov '06 22:03
    Originally posted by FabianFnas
    Fisher has not the same ELO as he had in the former day because of inactivity. So inactivity renders degradation. Not my idea. Why not here?

    One point minus every day, starting after a month inactivity, makes 365 rating points less after a year. If a ten top player is inactive for a year he doesn't deserve being in the ten top players anymore. That's my opinion.
    The ranking tables only show players who have moved within the last 100 days, so someone who has been inactive for a year wouldn't show there. So I don't see what's gained with your solution, but it has a big disadvantage - if a player would start playing again after taking a long break, we would have the same problem as with players who let a lot of games time out and end up with a rating far lower than their playing strength would suggest. It won't make those who play xym while xyr rating is far too low very happy.
  13. 11 Nov '06 22:42
    Originally posted by Nordlys
    The ranking tables only show players who have moved within the last 100 days, so someone who has been inactive for a year wouldn't show there. So I don't see what's gained with your solution, but it has a big disadvantage - if a player would start playing again after taking a long break, we would have the same problem as with players who let a lot of games ...[text shortened]... would suggest. It won't make those who play xym while xyr rating is far too low very happy.
    Okay, I fold.
    Just a thought.