07 Oct 10
I have several times clicked on "challenge player", then filled in the conditions and clicked proceed to find that the player is "already playing the maximum 6 games for a non-contributor.
Can you not link the "challenge player" offer to a condition which monitors the number of "in progress" games a non-contributor is playing so that "challenge player" doesn't appear but "challenges prohibited at present" or something similar
07 Oct 10
Even if it's a player I play regularly, this still happens upon hitting the 'rematch' button... You could of course both join a club, as opposed to the subs only clans, and as a site subscriber you could then leave an 'open invite' for the non sub and you can then get the challenge underway without any consideration to his 6 game limit.
08 Oct 10
Originally posted by Hyperion7Show in some way those players in a players list that cannot be challenged by you, of one reason or another.
I have several times clicked on "challenge player", then filled in the conditions and clicked proceed to find that the player is "already playing the maximum 6 games for a non-contributor.
Can you not link the "challenge player" offer to a condition which monitors the number of "in progress" games a non-contributor is playing so that "challenge player" doesn't appear but "challenges prohibited at present" or something similar
A symbol (like a red dot), or a way to filter only those who will take a challenge.
08 Oct 10
1 edit
Originally posted by RevRSleekerI think that particular loophole has been closed. 🙁
as a site subscriber you could then leave an 'open invite' for the non sub and you can then get the challenge underway without any consideration to his 6 game limit.
I support the idea of showing only the true challenge availability. It's annoying to type a game name, choose a colour, rating option, and time controls, only to have the challenge blocked for any number of reasons. Since challenges can be selectively blocked (for example, only within certain rating limits) it is not enough simply to show available/not available.
08 Oct 10
1 edit
Originally posted by KewpieA few weeks ago only it was still 'valid'..I have no problem utilising it for certain non subs, $40 is a months wages in India for instance, but only if it may well be weeks before that 6th free slot is available to them..I certainly wouldn't send a 7th game to one that could afford without undue hardship.. unless it's a non sub tourny I'm playing in whereby it'b be nigh on impossible to maintain the rounds without delving into the odd 7th game every now and then 🙂
I think that particular loophole has been closed. 🙁
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19789
09 Oct 10
Originally posted by RevRSleekerno it's not.
$40 is a months wages in India for instance
avarege monthly wage in india is $200, the lowest mimuin wage for an indian state i could find was $40 for a 'simple labourer' in 2005 in the jammu & kashmir states, hardly people who will have access to a computer to play chess.
check your facts before spewing bs.
09 Oct 10
1 edit
Originally posted by trev33You must have found all the well paid Indians 🙂
no it's not.
avarege monthly wage in india is $200, the lowest mimuin wage for an indian state i could find was $40 for a 'simple labourer' in 2005 in the jammu & kashmir states, hardly people who will have access to a computer to play chess.
check your facts before spewing bs.
Latest figures for 2008/2009
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/monthly-income-of-average-indian-crosses-rs-3000-pm/93782-7.html
This equates to around $65/$70 per month
09 Oct 10
Originally posted by trev33'spewing bs' eh, if somebody tells me this in a PM then why would I question it, perhaps you're the type that knows everything and questions everything anyone ever tells them ..
no it's not.
avarege monthly wage in india is $200, the lowest mimuin wage for an indian state i could find was $40 for a 'simple labourer' in 2005 in the jammu & kashmir states, hardly people who will have access to a computer to play chess.
check your facts before spewing bs.
'' 'simple labourer'... hardly people to have access to computer...to play chess.'' How dare you, who do you think you are...a world authority on internet access ??
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19789
10 Oct 10
Originally posted by RevRSleekeri'm the type of person who checks to see if info someone has given me is correct or not. you should try it.
'spewing bs' eh, if somebody tells me this in a PM then why would I question it, perhaps you're the type that knows everything and questions everything anyone ever tells them ..
'' 'simple labourer'... hardly people to have access to computer...to play chess.'' How dare you, who do you think you are...a world authority on internet access ??
' 'simple labourer'... hardly people to have access to computer...to play chess.'' How dare you, who do you think you are...a world authority on internet access ??
lets just say i'm not as ignorant as you to the cost of living in india and know a 'simple labourer' with a family to support will not have regular access to a computer. or at all, hhmmm surf the net or eat?? au who needs to eat today i'll play some chess.
yes, these people are really russ's uncovered goldmine 🙄
remember what this thread is about and think about it before responding.
- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 19789
10 Oct 10
Originally posted by adramforallhttp://www.neoncarrot.co.uk/h_aboutindia/india_economy_stats.html
You must have found all the well paid Indians 🙂
Latest figures for 2008/2009
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/monthly-income-of-average-indian-crosses-rs-3000-pm/93782-7.html
This equates to around $65/$70 per month
average monthly wage: 179 USD [GTF; 2005]
of course this includes the rich, as it should. that's how you as an average wage, by including everyone.
and it really does depend on where you live in india, the difference in average wage can be huge in different states.