Originally posted by Nargaguna 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 ...[text shortened]... st proposed the idea. Why not have a ballot to find what the subscribers think about it?
In that case there should be the option for non subscribers only too.
Why not have a ballot to find what the non-subscribers think about it?
It's simple enough to name the game non-subs only - I can't see any problem.
Ahhh i see ur bored n wanna argue..is this the bit where I'm suppossed to get angry and call u a name back?? Just wanna know the game rules before we start playing.........
Originally posted by Vladamir no1 Ahhh i see ur bored n wanna argue..is this the bit where I'm suppossed to get angry and call u a name back?? Just wanna know the game rules before we start playing.........
Originally posted by Nargaguna 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 ...[text shortened]... st proposed the idea. Why not have a ballot to find what the subscribers think about it?
Originally posted by Nargaguna 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?
Well I will say that I am now getting ancient.
Therefore I can only manage to work about six months of the year (seasonal work)
This means I can not afford to pay to play on this site as a subscriber.
I note that you have a couple of open invites that says subscribers only.
Surely people can read and will not take up the offer if they are not subscribers.
This surely will work. If anyone picks up one of your open invites who you don't want to play for one reason or another you have the chance to delete the game do you not.
Originally posted by Nargaguna 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 ...[text shortened]... st proposed the idea. Why not have a ballot to find what the subscribers think about it?
Agreed, the "discriminated against" carries little weight here as:
1. You can set rating limits (discriminating against lower or higher
rater players)
2.Every player -especially subs- should be allowed to associate with
whom they please.
I have nothing against non subs. Sometimes I would rather play a game against someone I KNOW takes the site seriously enough to pay for it. I am not talking about you if you can't afford it. There are many non subs I enjoy playing against. Naming the game "subs only" is not a bad idea but this is just a way to enforce it.
Subscribers Only
14 Jan '06 13:45
Back to Top