Go back
Subscribers Only

Subscribers Only

Site Ideas

Vote Up
Vote Down

It would be nice when creating a new game to have the option of making it for subscribers only.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by point
It would be nice when creating a new game to have the option of making it for subscribers only.
I dont think non-subs should be discriminated against.

Vote Up
Vote Down

I would like that option from time to time.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by celticcountry
I dont think non-subs should be discriminated against.
I second that. It would be nicer if subs stop picking on non-subs for no reason.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Third. Most non-subs are very pleasant, and we should not discriminate the rule abiding majority jjust because of the rule breaking majority. After all, non-subs are potential subs.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

I put up an open invite for 'NON-SUB SCUM ONLY' it finally got accepted and then swiftly deleted for some unknown reason. :'(

Maybe if you could name it 'subs only' or something brilliant they [we] would take the hint..

Vote Up
Vote Down

Subs or non-subs we are all here to play chess and to post in the forums. It is not as it is such a big issue. Besides some non-subs are better players than subs.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
I put up an open invite for 'NON-SUB SCUM ONLY' it finally got accepted and then swiftly deleted for some unknown reason. :'(

Maybe if you could name it 'subs only' or something brilliant they [we] would take the hint..
Would you like to have a game with me?😀

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by ericwong
Would you like to have a game with me?😀
Doctors and Nurses?

D

Vote Up
Vote Down

It's not because an option exists that anyone has to use it. So from that perspective it doesn't hurt anyone if it''s there, and it makes some of us happy.

In the same vein, sometimes I'd like to be able to exclude provisionally rated players.

It's just a matter of options and choices.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by CeSinge
It's not because an option exists that anyone has to use it. So from that perspective it doesn't hurt anyone if it''s there, and it makes some of us happy.

In the same vein, sometimes I'd like to be able to exclude provisionally rated players.

It's just a matter of options and choices.
Rating limits exclude provisionals if I remember rightly.

It does seem like non-subs abandon more games. But in the grand scheme of things I'm not sure it's a big deal.

Vote Up
Vote Down

>>Rating limits exclude provisionals if I remember rightly.

I wouldn't know how to do that. Imho, provisionals can have any rating.

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by CeSinge
>>Rating limits exclude provisionals if I remember rightly.

I wouldn't know how to do that. Imho, provisionals can have any rating.
I mean if you impose any rating limit then provs can't accept the game. So if you have a limit of >500 and less than 3000 for example.

Edited because it didn't like the less than symbol.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by mrmist
It does seem like non-subs abandon more games.
With only 6 on the go, I guess it is more tempting to sack off a stale game and get a fresh one going.

Vote Up
Vote Down

I support the proposal to allow subcribers to stipulate 'Subscibers Only' when poating a new game. We are not asking you to 'discriminate against non-subscribers'; merely to allow those of us
who put our money where our mouths are to excercise the option if we individually wish. This has nothing to do with the 'pleasantness' or otherwise of the nons as you suggest in your unsatisfactory reply to 'point' who first proposed the idea. Why not have a ballot to find what the subscribers think about it?