Go back
Non-subscribers - again

Non-subscribers - again

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by skeeter
Thats a first for you Gav. Needing an edit to post a link.

Standards are slipping.

skeeter
I actually got rid of some text with my edit but nice try there.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by jayaitch
If it wasn't for the subscribers there would be no site to play on!
[most] Non-subs have adverts - you're just jealous.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by XanthosNZ
I actually got rid of some text with my edit but nice try there.
Nah! That simply won't wash. Edit's are edits - that means you amended the original post, which was only a link. Thats a retraction in my book and a goof-up.

skeeter

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by jayaitch
Having reached the giddy height of 1566 (soon to drop like a stone I fear) I had a look at my position in the league table. I was amazed at the number of non-subscribers in the 1500-1600 bracket many of whom have played a substantial number of games. As I doubt if I will win a tournamentI i am considering seriously not re-subscribing and just playing invi ...[text shortened]... y there shoulb be a maximum on the number of games a person can plsy before having to subscribe!
You do realise that there is quite a difference between 200+ games and 6 games, right?

And I don't understand people who state that somehow their experience of the site is lessened by the fact that we have members from poor countries for whom $30 is huge.

So with your suggestion, you'd prefer people to abandon their accounts, and set up new ones to play another 100 games.

Seriously, have you thought about this at all?

D

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by adramforall
Maybe they subscribed before they let it lapse, being happy enough to play a max of 6 games at a time.
As in my case.....

I currently don't have time for more than 6 games.
So if it free to play a max of 6 then I will do so.

Vote Up
Vote Down
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Ragnorak
we have members from poor countries for whom $30 is huge.
Like me.... :'(

Vote Up
Vote Down

Most-subscribers started out as non-subscribers. Some end up once again as Non-subs. You would think they were all stock holders the way they think they own the place. Dudes you don't own you just rent. The rent you pay brings just a few more privileges is all. Social Snobbery is not included in the package. If you want to run the business go start your own.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Pardon me for intruding into this thread, but i have something to say on this subject if i may. The majority of players at the top of the table places are subscribers and the lower you get on the table, the more non-subs you have(for example out of the nearest 50 to me, there is only one subscriber). Perhaps in these cases the non-subscribers feel that they are not very good at chess and are only playing for fun. I am in no way suggesting that all the subscribers take it very seriously. In my case i find 6 games to be adequate enough for me, as i'm not on this site 24 hours a day.
Plus people who like to play a lot chess should subscribe cos then they can have the opportunity to play in clans and tornaments so it is value for money. It's just not for me (i don't want to play that much chess).