tournaments

you need to have more tournaments for non-paying members. just to be nice. playing people in their own rating ranges. some people just are not interested in the super serious aspect of the game .

Originally posted by @jlpmjm
you need to have more tournaments for non-paying members. just to be nice. playing people in their own rating ranges. some people just are not interested in the super serious aspect of the game .

Why?

Personally I think non-paying members are merely parasites. Cut there games and severely limit their posting privileges would be more apt in my opinion.

If you want more tournament play then become a subscriber. Simple as that !!

Originally posted by @radioactive69
Why?

Personally I think non-paying members are merely parasites. Cut there games and severely limit their posting privileges would be more apt in my opinion.

If you want more tournament play then become a subscriber. Simple as that !!

Spot on

Originally posted by @jlpmjm
you need to have more tournaments for non-paying members. just to be nice. playing people in their own rating ranges. some people just are not interested in the super serious aspect of the game .

Then what would the point in subscribing be?

Originally posted by @jlpmjm
you need to have more tournaments for non-paying members. just to be nice. playing people in their own rating ranges. some people just are not interested in the super serious aspect of the game .

So go play on Yahoo. They don't take the game very seriously. Or, Chess Heroz on Facebook. That one is a joke to serious players. You'll be right at home!

Originally posted by @jlpmjm
you need to have more tournaments for non-paying members. just to be nice. playing people in their own rating ranges. some people just are not interested in the super serious aspect of the game .

I have no issue with tournaments being almost exclusively a membership feature. There have to be a few carrots to warrant subscription. Business survival trumps nicety.

Comparing non-subs to parasites though is rather shortsighted. (Non-subs after all are the potential members of the future).

On the other site I play on we use 'guests' as a resource, and plug gaps in teams and tournaments etc to aid site activity. But i'm sure this is something Russ has considered.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
I have no issue with tournaments being almost exclusively a membership feature. There have to be a few carrots to warrant subscription. Business survival trumps nicety.

Comparing non-subs to parasites though is rather shortsighted. (Non-subs after all are the potential members of the future).

On the other site I play on we use 'guests' as a r ...[text shortened]... ms and tournaments etc to aid site activity. But i'm sure this is something Russ has considered.

so why don't you subscribe ?

Originally posted by @padger
so why don't you subscribe ?

I do.

Just not here. That of course could change in the future if I decided to transfer more of my chess playing on to this site.

Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-duke
I do.

Just not here. That of course could change in the future if I decided to transfer more of my chess playing on to this site.

Well hurry up freeloader. 🙂

Originally posted by @padger
Spot on

Give a taste of the good stuff don't hide it.