Originally posted by gezza
But I started commenting on a thread which just suggested a fix, for something I didn't see as broken...
Let's say that vacation is making the problem more extreme, but I don't see it as the root cause.
The real issue seems to be all the tournament entries, which he or anyone else could do without the vacation. Thus my "Silly Question"
Yes, saw your 'I understand now...' thread in another forum after I'd posted here. My position on Atri started out differently from what it is now. I joined in appreciating the silly nature of the phenomenon and poked fun at it in other forum threads. Only when TJ expressed his anxiety at the behavior did I consider the real damage Atri was doing to what I consider the finest chess community online.
As a community, it is an ever-evolving work of art, if you will. And it is a business. The usability factor plays into attracting, but more importantly retaining subscribers. I work in IT and have developed many websites, far less complex than this one, and I get the need to amend The Work to keep users happy and parting with their hard-earned cash. That process never ends and should not. RHP is a living thing and as problems arise, the living thing either ignores them (as you have recommended in one of your posts) or evolves to correct them.
I think you'd agree that the way things are now allows for any one player to take on an impossible gameload. Others have said that taking on an unlimited number of games is a selling feature of RHP and I get that. But one person's privilege to take on games becomes the opposite of a selling point when it starts to cause grief to other players.
From my perspective, the ONLY reason for vacation is to let subs dodge timeouts. I think since I've joined, I've taken only one or two vacation days because my schedule allows me to play quite a bit. Others feel the need to use vacation as a hedge against losing games to timeouts. The fact that RHP added the vacation option in response to customer needs is an indication that the site is willing to evolve in response to user requirements. What these threads suggest is the need for further evolution.
Change is inevitable. Guiding that change to further improve a wonderful site is the responsibility of every caring member here. Some members say 'no, don't change, I love it exactly as it is' but with each successive iteration, it gets stronger, more useful, and better capable of attracting and
retaining subscribers and the health of RHP benefits us all.
So
if change is inevitable as it
must be, then rational voices must guide that change, to block rogue actions of the few without impeding the players who patronize the site in rational and respectful ways.
Thanks for listening,
Steve