GREAT idea: remove that idiotic 'vacation sign...

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Just trying to get some facts. The fact that you won't post the pgn with move times implies that you are overstating your opponent's behaviour.

I suggest you don't take anything other than entry-level logic classes, because it implies no such thing.

Having said that, I believe I'm well within my right of accusing you of wanting to punish thousands of players.

I'm not denying that right, but I would like to know where you got it.

What you want to do is ensure that players who have invested months of time in their games lose all their hard work when something unexpected comes up.

I can see your point, but I'm convinced the vacation settings will be abused more often than used.

Timebank and vacation run concurrently. Your timebank will run down while your vacation is on, so to say that you are also adding on 36 days isn't strictly true.

Maybe not STRICTLY, but when someone starts using vacation settings the same DAY his time bank was depleted AND he moved several times since --but not in his game against me-- then I get suspicious.

Don't start a game when you're going on holiday for 5 weeks.
I'm still taking part in a tournament on here which started in 2004, over 3 years ago. Do you honestly expect me to know that I'm going on holiday for 5 weeks when I entered that tournament 3 years ago?[/b]

Admittedly, another good point. I don't know how tournaments work and why they would typically have longer running times (I guess you play against multiple players). But why not restrict vacation settings to tournaments? Let other games be ruled by the more-than-reasonable amount of time one gets through time-per-move + time bank?

Originally posted by StrayJay
Originally posted by Ragnorak
[b]Just trying to get some facts. The fact that you won't post the pgn with move times implies that you are overstating your opponent's behaviour.

I suggest you don't take anything other than entry-level logic classes, because it implies no such thing.

Having said that, I believe I'm well within my right the more-than-reasonable amount of time one gets through time-per-move + time bank?[/b]

I suggest you don't take anything other than entry-level logic classes, because it implies no such thing.
I don't know what else it implies. You accuse October of a certain behaviour, but decline the opportunity to easily show us his "shocking" behaviour.

I can see your point, but I'm convinced the vacation settings will be abused more often than used.
There is no way to "abuse" the vacation flag, seeing as Russ' stated intention was that it was only to provide protection from TO for a certain length of time, and that the time could be used as the user sees fit.

I agree that for casual games, the players should be able to set it up vacation free. (Don't tell Dr S I said that 😉)

D

Originally posted by Ragnorak
I don't know what else it implies. You accuse October of a certain behaviour, but decline the opportunity to easily show us his "shocking" behaviour.

I didn't accuse October of anything; I was referring to a player in anonymous terms --which is also the reason why I didn't post the info you asked for. Which in turn illustrates my point that my refusal did not imply what you said it did; and I could come up with other reasons why I wouldn't want to post that data. All in all it proves my point that you used the verb 'implies' too loosely to be logical.

And please note that I never used the word 'shocking' to describe this behavior. I don't feel like checking it, but I'm pretty sure the strongest term I used is 'annoying' --which you'll probably admit describes shown behavior accurately.

There is no way to "abuse" the vacation flag, seeing as Russ' stated intention was that it was only to provide protection from TO for a certain length of time, and that the time could be used as the user sees fit.

Since you did a background check, don't you feel I have a point? And doesn't that turn the use into abuse?

I agree that for casual games, the players should be able to set it up vacation free. (Don't tell Dr S I said that 😉)

I'm pretty sure your secret's not safe! 🙂

Originally posted by StrayJay
Originally posted by Ragnorak
[b]I don't know what else it implies. You accuse October of a certain behaviour, but decline the opportunity to easily show us his "shocking" behaviour.

I didn't accuse October of anything; I was referring to a player in anonymous terms --which is also the reason why I didn't post the info you asked for. Which ...[text shortened]... l Dr S I said that 😉)[/b]

I'm pretty sure your secret's not safe! 🙂[/b]

You were hardly anonymous considering it took 1 brief look at your games in progress to see who you were talking about. Now that we all know that it is October who you were accusing of unfair behaviour, will you post the timestamped pgn?

Do I feel you have a point in wanting to punish thousands of players on the site, because 1 player put up a vacation flag while in a lost position against you, choosing to use his vacation days in that manner? No, not really.

D

Originally posted by StrayJay
Originally posted by Ragnorak
[b]I don't know what else it implies. You accuse October of a certain behaviour, but decline the opportunity to easily show us his "shocking" behaviour.

I didn't accuse October of anything; I was referring to a player in anonymous terms --which is also the reason why I didn't post the info you asked for. Which ...[text shortened]... l Dr S I said that 😉)[/b]

I'm pretty sure your secret's not safe! 🙂[/b]

What's in your hands?

It's your ASS that Rags just handed you.

P-

Rag, what is it with you and this ridiculous vacation system. Such zeal. Are the admins paying you to defend it?

Players were asked "Would you be happy if players were immune from timeout while on vacation for a limited period (e.g. 4 weeks per year)?"

Apart from the disaster of starting a poll question with the loaded words "Would you be happy", there are just so many things wrong with that question. The outcome was a foregone conclusion. Although I was against the new vacation system, had I not realised that the question implied "in addition to the current timeout/timebank system" I would have voted in favour too.

Threads like this are popping up all the time. You can attack everyone who starts them, but sooner or later you will have to ask yourself why so many people are complaining about, and being frustrated by, a system that they supposedly voted so overwhelmingly for.

Fact is, they did not vote for it. They simply agreed in large numbers that they would be happy with something "reasonable and nice". Players at this site certainly did not vote in favour of the soporific vacation system that we currently enjoy.

However, I do manage to remain quite happy on the whole, despite this.

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Rag, what is it with you and this ridiculous vacation system. Such zeal. Are the admins paying you to defend it?

Players were asked "Would you be happy if players were immune from timeout while on vacation for a limited period (e.g. 4 weeks per year)?"

Apart from the disaster of starting a poll question with the loaded words "Would you be happy", ...[text shortened]... rrently enjoy.

However, I do manage to remain quite happy on the whole, despite this.

Don't get me wrong Gate, but no one is going to start a thread called "I really like the vacation system!" Those who complain are not always the majority, but the most vocal in most instances.

We will only hear from those who DO NOT like it. You can see that vote is still open, and a majority of users are still "happy" as you put it.

If they were not "happy" they would change their vote.

I think the vacation system stinks, and I don't like it. But I also don't like when someone complains that a user has slowed down in their game. So what? You just wait and eventually you will get your win unless you are for some reason unable to wait, or blunder because you are impatient..

As long as that vote shows that most people like it, we'll need to assume most users do like it. As long as it's being used by RHP, I'll respect it... but I don't have to like it and will complain about it. Rags is welcome to defend it. That doesn't mean his nose is in anyone's bottom.

P-

Originally posted by StrayJay
It's just not fair.

"It's just not fair" that the said player is fully cooperating with the time controls given to him in the said game(s)?

In other words, "It's just not fair" that s/he's not playing by the rules?

Boo-hoo.

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Rag, what is it with you and this ridiculous vacation system. Such zeal. Are the admins paying you to defend it?

Because I haven't seen a good reason why it shouldn't be defended.

This site is a business.

Tell me which is more likely...players going to leave the site because somebody put up their vacation flag and they can't time them out?

Or

Players leaving the site because after spending 3 years progressing to the final of a tournament, and spending months of time on their other games, they have a period where they can't get online (family bereavement, natural disaster, loss of job/internet access, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc) and they come back to find out that all of their hard work (on a fun internet chess site, I remind you), has been wasted because all of their games have timed out?

You state it yourself: "However, I do manage to remain quite happy on the whole, despite this." You despise this vacation system, but are still happy on the site. Would somebody who needs the time off be able to say the same?

Now, the key point to remember is that this site is supposed to be for leisure. Some people get so caught up in points and tournament victories, that they lose site of that fact. There are no medals awarded, nor financial rewards: this site is what it is: a place to unwind doing what you enjoy.

I know you're still bitter that your timebank increasing due to fast play idea wasn't implemented. But are you honestly telling me that there wouldn't be a flood of threads giving out that their opponent's timebank is increasing, or that their opponent has way more timebank than them. HOW UNFAIR!!! Seriously? At the time, I thought it was a very good diea, but then I remembered that the majority of people need an extremely simple solution.

As far as I'm concerned, the current vacation system is the best proposed in its stated function to provide a certain length of time off from the site for whatever reason. Currently, the only people who are complaining are the timeout junkies, the people bitter that their opponent is moving while on vacation and the people who want to manipulate their ratings by holding out on losses, while playing on in wins.

If somebody proposes a better system, I'd support it. Fabian made numerous posts describing a flawless vacation system, but when pushed to iron out some MAJOR flaws, he took it as a personal attack. Sealed moves has potential, but not while somebody might have to make 900 moves before being able to go vacation.
Others have simply suggested that the vacation flag be gotten rid of. These types of posters haven't thought beyond the fact that they want to time somebody out.

D

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Although I was against the new vacation system, had I not realised that the question implied [b]"in addition to the current timeout/timebank system" I would have voted in favour too.
[/b]

Any of my opponents who have gone on vacation have returned with 0 timebank remaining, meaning they have to play faster with a higher chance of being TO'ed for the remainder of the game, seeing as the timebank still runs down while somebody is on vacation.

It seems you don't fully understand how the vacation system works in some cases.

D

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Because I haven't seen a good reason why it shouldn't be defended.

This site is a business.

Tell me which is more likely...players going to leave the site because somebody put up their vacation flag and they can't time them out?

Or

Players leaving the site because after spending 3 years progressing to the final of a tournament, and spending mo ...[text shortened]... f posters haven't thought beyond the fact that they want to time somebody out.

D

Damn good post.

Since apparently returning from a holiday, my esteemed opponent played on at least two occasions (two days), but of course not in the game against me.

And today, a day and a half before a possible time-out, (s)he decided to go on holiday. Again.

To be continued.

Originally posted by StrayJay
Since apparently returning from a holiday, my esteemed opponent played on at least two occasions (two days), but of course not in the game against me.

And today, a day and a half before a possible time-out, (s)he decided to go on holiday. Again.

To be continued.

So what? Are you even reading this thread? Everyone has vacation time to use ANY way they please. I will be taking my vacation in December just so I can spend more time in the forums goofing off and laughing at the haters.

P-

Originally posted by Phlabibit
I will be taking my vacation in December just so I can spend more time in the forums goofing off and laughing at the haters.

Feature request: black lists.

Originally posted by Phlabibit
I will be taking my vacation in December just so I can spend more time in the forums goofing off and laughing at the haters.

P-

Make sure you start a bunch of open invite games against non-subs in November. This should greatly increase the entertainment value....







[Note to self] Do NOT play against Phlabby in December! [/Note to self]