- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
14 Mar 07
Originally posted by RussMy thoughts are that 36 days is too long, and as mentioned in the other thread, abuse could occur, so if this does occur, lowering this number would help I think.
Please direct further questions to the help forum.
-Russ
I see it like this:
A sub creates lots of 1 day timeout games, with no timebank, makes enough moves to avoid the game being deleted, then goes on vacation (on purpose) for 36 days, making no moves.
Non-subs resigns game andmoves to the next one, sub gains lots of free rating points.
We shall see if this actually does become a problem...
14 Mar 07
1 edit
Originally posted by Bad wolfPrecisely!
My thoughts are that 36 days is too long, and as mentioned in the other thread, abuse could occur, so if this does occur, lowering this number would help I think.
I see it like this:
A sub creates lots of 1 day timeout games, with no timebank, makes enough moves to avoid the game being deleted, then goes on vacation (on purpose) for 36 days, making no m ...[text shortened]... ub gains lots of free rating points.
We shall see if this actually does become a problem...
Why can't there be a simple on/off switch for open invites at least.
I'm finishing off my last two games against subscribers - it's too risky to play them anymore.
- Joined
- 23 Jul 05
- Moves
- 8869
16 Mar 07
Originally posted by RamnedIt against this site's rules to use chess engines as well, but look at how many subs have been banned for doing that...
C'Mon, subs, don't do that.
(And non-subs, hint, when you are going on vacation, put it on your profile. Better than nothing. Message opponents.)
17 Mar 07
2 edits
Originally posted by Bad wolfI can't see how giving subscribers an advantage in the games can be justified as fair play.
It against this site's rules to use chess engines as well, but look at how many subs have been banned for doing that...
How can one player in the game be allowed to leave for 5 weeks whereas the other HAS to move, be fair. 😞
17 Mar 07
can there be at least some kind of counter visible to see how long someone can still wait before moving?
36 days is ridiculously long, i don't like the new vacation system anyways but if we have no choice then at least make it something reasonable like 14 days. If people want to take a longer vacation than that they should just not start games that span their vacation time.
17 Mar 07
Originally posted by wittywonkaHow does that change anything - timebank/timeouts are stopped when someone goes on vacation.
Also, if you're that strongly opposed to long amounts of time, just shorten your timebank/timeout lengths...
Problem solved.
Problem not solved like that.
18 Mar 07
Originally posted by coentjeI agree.
36 days is ridiculously long, i don't like the new vacation system anyways but if we have no choice then at least make it something reasonable like 14 days. If people want to take a longer vacation than that they should just not start games that span their vacation time.