rule about move timeouts? I hate it when people start losing a game and stop moving until there time runs out. Maybe it's just me, or maybe it's everybody else too, but I think we should be able to report these people to the site authorities and have them banned or force a forfeit. For us non-subscribers not in a position to be subscribing yet, 6 games is not enough when you have 5 of them that never move.
I understand what you mean Alpha10 (being a non-subscriber myself), but these are the rules of correspondence chess, you agree with your opponent on a certain time limit when starting a game, and you timeout him if he/she doesen't move in agreed time frame. I don't see why an administrator of this site should ban people that are playing by the rules, and are conducting themselfs in accordance to the Terms of Service.
...6 games is not enough... Well show me a site (as great as RHP) that gives you more for free??🙄
The point I was trying to make is that the PEOPLE THAT MOVE QUICKLY UNTIL THEY START LOSING OR KNOW THEY'VE LOST should be disciplined. It's unfair to the opponent.
Originally posted by Alpha10 The point I was trying to make is that the PEOPLE THAT MOVE QUICKLY UNTIL THEY START LOSING OR KNOW THEY'VE LOST should be disciplined. It's unfair to the opponent.
Alpha,
Subscribers have the same trouble. It's just that some people, for reasons known only to themselves, prefer to skirt the time out limit.
Originally posted by Alpha10 The point I was trying to make is that the PEOPLE THAT MOVE QUICKLY UNTIL THEY START LOSING OR KNOW THEY'VE LOST should be disciplined. It's unfair to the opponent.
Yes it is unfair to the opponent, unfortunately these people are within the rules of the game (rules upon both you and your opponent had agreed). Frankly if Russ starts to ban people on this account, I think he would have full hands.
If this bothers you so much consider subscribing, and there will be no limit on the number of games you play.
Originally posted by Panuka Yes it is unfair to the opponent, unfortunately these people are within the rules of the game (rules upon both you and your opponent had agreed). Frankly if Russ starts to ban people on this account, I think he would have full hands.
If this bothers you so much consider subscribing, and there will be no limit on the number of games you play.
I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say.....I'm not saying BAN them, I'm saying maybe we should be given a force forfeit option or something.
Originally posted by Panuka I read it. So what do you think should (could?) be done about this Feivel?
I don't think there is reasonable solution to this.
No solution. Just play short time outs with a small time bank.
Originally posted by Alpha10 I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say.....I'm not saying BAN them, I'm saying maybe we should be given a force forfeit option or something.
We already have that option. It's called "claim victory", and you can use it when your opponent has actually used up all of their time.
If they still have time, we do not get to use it just because they don't move as often as we think they should.
well a possible solution may be to keep a list of players offending on that count. If too many complaints are found about a player a flame mail might be sent to him, so that he would be carefull next time.
Basically, most of the people are good at heart, they just need a reminder of this😏
Originally posted by Alpha10 I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say.....I'm not saying BAN them, I'm saying maybe we should be given a force forfeit option or something.
We understand what you're saying; we just disagree with it. I don't think there should be penalties (like forced forfeits) for playing within the rules, especially rules (like time limits) that players can negotiate and agree to in advance.
Don't talk to me like I'm a dumbass, ok? Simple enough? I'll be keeping an eye on these boards and seeing if any of you bitch about people taking a long time to move. I'm not gonna try and reiterate my point because none of you agree with me, but when it takes somebody an hour before the timeout to make 1 move and they do this purposely, then it's not real chess, and thats what I'm saying should be dealt with.
Originally posted by Alpha10 Don't talk to me like I'm a dumbass, ok? Simple enough? I'll be keeping an eye on these boards and seeing if any of you bitch about people taking a long time to move. I'm not gonna try and reiterate my point because none of you agree with me, but when it takes somebody an hour before the timeout to make 1 move and they do this purposely, then it's not real chess, and thats what I'm saying should be dealt with.
And still you already agreed with the timeout and timebank period. It is completely within the rules to play a move an hour before the timeoutperiod expires. Obviously you don't like the rules the way they are.
I am not sure what you really intend to do about it, besides agreeing with your opponents about the amount of timeout and timebank periods. If you like games to move as fast as possible I suggest try to play live matches on or of the board ... although I am a "fast" player myself I can't see any unfairness in players using all the time they and you agreed upon.
Originally posted by Alpha10 Don't talk to me like I'm a dumbass, ok? Simple enough? I'll be keeping an eye on these boards and seeing if any of you bitch about people taking a long time to move. I'm not gonna try and reiterate my point because none of you agree wi ...[text shortened]... s not real chess, and thats what I'm saying should be dealt with.
I think you're feeling the frustration more than most because as a non-member you are limited to 6 concurrent games. If you sign up to the site you can play as many games as you like and adjust your personal settings to only accept games with a 3 day time out and no timebank.
05 Jul '04 04:47
Why in't there a......
Back to Top