1 edit
Originally posted by rathishNow where did you get that assumption from? what I was pointing out in answer to the statement suggesting that it would be better if non-subscribers were allowed 10 games was:
So, you guys believe that the people who cannot afford to pay should stop playing online chess ????
1) Getting 6 games free is an excellent freebie on this site for non subscribers
2) If the site gave more than 6 games the incentive for players to subscibe is diminished
3) If less players subscibed (see 2 above) then the site would itself become at risk from an economic point of view (you do realise that the site needs financial resources to run itself and that the investors are entitled to at least to hope to make a profit for their outlay?)
Furthermore if 10 games were given to non subscribers and less players subscibed as a consequence then there would also be less games going on because
a) the players who did not subscribe but who would have otherwise can only play 10 games instead of unlimited
b) the same players would not be playing clan or tournament games
So in summary what I am saying is NOT that you should not play here, but that you should consider yourself very lucky to be able to do so for free and to be asking for more free games is pushing it and in my opinion quite rude and showing ingratitude for what you have received free.
Originally posted by rathishI also believe that if you cannot afford the payments and the fuel, you should not drive a Hummer. If you cannot handle the payments on a large house, live in a small one.
So, you guys believe that the people who cannot afford to pay should stop playing online chess ????
Nothing worth having is free.