Originally posted by adramforallIf a player signs up for a 3/0 tournament, should they be "punished" when they realise that they actually need more time?
However it does not solve the problem of tournaments with criteria "Vacations not allowed" that may last 18 months + and have players who have genuine holidays to take in the 2nd or later year.
Should people then be punished for taking a holiday 19 months after they started the tournament, even though they have their vacation flag set ?
All holidays are considered genuine under the current "Use your vacation time anyway you please" system. If a player decides to not allow others to take "genuine vacations" (because he thinks they are only extending their timebank), then obviously neither can they.
If a tournament goes on for 3 years, I don't see a few days vacation being that important, so I don't see the point in signing up for "No vacation allowed" tournaments. If they do, then they know the rules.
D
Ive only just joined the site, but have noticed a couple of people abusing the vacation settings, one is a top 20 player who is protecting himself from timeouts.
Im not too sure how vacation settings work, but wouldnt it stop abuse by players if, when you set the flag, you cant make a move. If you are declaring you cant move because you are on holiday, why not take away the right to move, then the system cannot be abused at all.
Sorry to butt in.
Originally posted by FatSteveHow is that abuse? That is what the vacation system was introduced for...
Ive only just joined the site, but have noticed a couple of people abusing the vacation settings, one is a top 20 player who is protecting himself from timeouts.
"1) Players on vacation and their opponents can continue to move. It is only protection from timeout for a fixed number of days, nothing more.
2) A player must clear down games at risk from timeout before their vacation ends. Removal of the vacation flag will end any protection. The vacation page help will be updated to make this clear.
3) People can use their days as they please.
-Russ"
See Thread 63417
D
Originally posted by FatSteveI haven't looked at the specific case, but how is using a system designed to be used "anyway you want" abuse or not in the spirit of the game?
Hi, I have already conceded that the case of the top 20 player is not the issue, but in the other case, (rlchapman) surely this is not within the spirit of the game.
I may be wrong, but it just seems a bit off.
Is the system right? Totally different topic, and pointing fingers and trying to instigate witch hunts on individuals who simply use a system as it was supposed to be used helps nobody.
D
Im not trying to instigate a witch hunt, im taking part in a conversation and expressing my views. I have used RLCHAPMAN as a prime example of somebody who is deliberately (although as you state within the rules) exploiting a system that is not really (once again in my opinion) be designed for it.
If the system is specifically set up for that, then everybody would avoid moving in their losing games, and push through their winning ones in order to reach their personal ratings goal, all in a cosy 36 day window. Thats a lot of games not being attended to, and a lot more games satarted in order to try to win them.
If you dont think that is abuse of the system, then maybe I have joined the wrong place to play my chess. Either way, its no skin off my nose, I was just observing what you are probably too shortsighted to see.
Originally posted by FatSteveYou ARE instigating a witch hunt. You ARE trying to single people out to bully them, by implying that they are abusing a system which is impossible to abuse: purely by the fact that the vacation system has been designed and implemented and explained to us that we can use it any way we want by the site owners.
Im not trying to instigate a witch hunt, im taking part in a conversation and expressing my views. I have used RLCHAPMAN as a prime example of somebody who is deliberately (although as you state within the rules) exploiting a system that is not really (once again in my opinion) be designed for it.
If the system is specifically set up for that, then ever ...[text shortened]... ay, its no skin off my nose, I was just observing what you are probably too shortsighted to see.
Reread your post if you don't believe that you are trying to bully people. You single out rlchapman and accuse him of "abusing" something and not playing to the "spirit of the game" and "a bit off". Maybe you are too "shortsighted" to realise that when you try to fan flames of negativity against an other user, you are bullying them and you are looking for others to join you in your witch hunt and negative accusations.
It seems you may not have all the facts. 1st, read the thread I linked to above. Then read this thread: Thread 71612, remembering that Russ is the site owner.
You accuse me of shortsightedness, which can only be a blatant troll, because if you read my posts in this very thread you'd notice that I agree that there is a problem with the current system, and in a constructive manner, propose a fix for that problem.
I'm sure your sight is good enough to notice that I didn't choose the path of negativity, witch hunting and bullying. As you say, you may have chosen the wrong place to play chess. I might have to agree with you, if your starting behaviour is anything to go by.
D
Ok, i think I got off on the wrong foot here, but, and it is a big but, I am entitled to an opinion, and even if you disagree wholeheartedly, my opinion will stay the same.
I am not deliberately trying to be negative or "bully" people, but I, in a short space of time being on this site, feel that there are loopholes in the vacation system that allow improper use of it.
I used rlchapman as an example, because his profile actually boasts of what he is doing, he has no qualms about it, so as far as im concerned, me highlighting it would not be an issue to him.
I do find it a bit off when someone takes on 500+ games and only plays the winning ones under the "vacation flag", leaving all his losing games until after the flag expires. The reason he is doing it is to get as high a rating as possible, regardless of how.
As I said at the begining of the post I dont want to instigate a witch hunt, and I certainly dont want to be so negative, but thats how I feel.
Steve
Originally posted by FatSteveFair enough. I hadn't actually looked at his profile.
I used rlchapman as an example, because his profile actually boasts of what he is doing, he has no qualms about it, so as far as im concerned, me highlighting it would not be an issue to him.
As I said, it is his choice. It will probably come back to haunt him later in the year, when he has no vacation left and his timebanks are all gone. It'll also affect his ability to enter banded tournaments at his proper band for 100 days. I don't think he's thought too clearly about what he is doing.
As I see it, there is no perfect solution for vacations. It has been discussed at length in the past.
D
Originally posted by FatSteverichapman admits to abusing the site (see his profile). He's running up his score as much as he can and is ignoring games he cannot win. He's told me he plans on quitting the site in a few weeks and really just wants the high score.
Ok, point taken, is that what rlchapman is doing then?
I assume this is because he teaches chess to kids (or says he does) and he wants to be able to say how highly he was rated.
Kind of sad really.
Originally posted by erice1Yeah I agree, especially since I have 2 won games against him in one of the tournaments we are in.
richapman admits to abusing the site (see his profile). He's running up his score as much as he can and is ignoring games he cannot win. He's told me he plans on quitting the site in a few weeks and really just wants the high score.
I assume this is because he teaches chess to kids (or says he does) and he wants to be able to say how highly he was rated.
Kind of sad really.