this is called thread jacking btw and is also something I will use my newfound moderation power to stamp out :P
We can write in Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, German or Spanish if my misspelling bother you that much.
Players disconnecting midgame need to be flagged
Sort:
mrhjornevik wrote:
this is called thread jacking btw and is also something I will use my newfound moderation power to stamp out :P
Unfortunately, there is already a presidant on Chess.com of NOT disuading what you call 'hijacking' of threads.
In fact, it is often this 'hijacking' of threads that leads to much more interesting conversations.
Like rednecks.
hehe I know what you mean, and look at me I am following along so I'm realy no better ;P But it's not the hijacking of threads thats the problem in it's self. It's more a symptom that add ups to the sorry state of the chess.com forum.
Like this thread her. This thread was spesificly made to solve a problem (players disconecting). If we now spend a few pages talking about the weather before we start debating disconecting players agaim, its fun, but at the same time it makes the whole thread useless for the moderaters if they wanted to enforce some of the ideas presentated they would be unable to find them inbetween all the redneck/wallmart/weather talk.
It seems to me, there are 2 types of threads:
Threads that can be solved with a technical answer. In this case, it only takes a few responses to solve. Then the thread becomes a deadend.
Threads that are more about opinion than any solid answers. And these, usually, after the first page or so have had the full scope of possible opinions. And become pointless rhetoric by the end of the second page.
But, thanks to hijacking pioneers like Kaynight and myself, these threads are kept alive to server a much bigger purpose......
Our personal entertainment.
well Im not sure I would put this one in the technical answer.
I'm going to break another rule and do some inforum commercial and hopfulle the mods will miss it :P
If you want to see how a forum should be run check out http://forum.nationstates.net/. Think what you want about the book and the game, but as a forum it is one of the most brilliant on the web.
(I havent been there latly so I have no idea whats going on right now)
Well, that's because they are a bunch of geeks with nothing else to do.
Not like chess players.
I totally agree with you the site already sunk with jammers 7 untrusted players
kaynight wrote:
Here we go again and again. Non- payer bumping his gums over a trivial issue. Should your opponent disconnect, you win...end of.
kaynight,
Don't you think you're being a little bit impatient? Yes, the subject is not new and you do win when disconnection takes place normally, but having to wait, for example, half an hour, is annoying and frustrating. It would be good if something could be done. I noticed another thread this am where somebody was complaining, in somewhat exotic language, that he had been banned from live chess. So, it looks like action can be taken.
RG1951 wrote:
kaynight wrote:
Here we go again and again. Non- payer bumping his gums over a trivial issue. Should your opponent disconnect, you win...end of.
kaynight,
Don't you think you're being a little bit impatient? Yes, the subject is not new and you do win when disconnection takes place normally, but having to wait, for example, half an hour, is annoying and frustrating. It would be good if something could be done. I noticed another thread this am where somebody was complaining, in somewhat exotic language, that he had been banned from live chess. So, it looks like action can be taken.
after some games you get banned for a short time and then you are back
captainskrips wrote:
This is a persistent issue, a pathetic player with child's mentality disconnects during a game leaving you hanging. And I know sometimes it happens because of an actual connection issue but surely there are ways to distinguish between a random connection issue and persistent disconnections.
A simple colour coding of players on the live game graph for example can give a quick indication which players disconnect often and which ones don't:
green - none to low disconnection issues
amber - some disconnection issues
red - constant disconnection issues
It's a simple idea and can't be particuarly hard to code. It can also work when picking just a random game, players can be paired up by their colour code, greens v greens, ambers v ambers and reds v reds, let all the child-like imbeciles play one another and watch each other disconnect, while all the other people who want to play properly can just get on with it.
Just an idea.
When your opponent disconnect you win.
Whether you sit and wait for them to timeout, or youre playing, youre still at the game. Enjoy the down time.
right now my head is nearly bursting by your stupidority. A tearm describing how superior your stuid is!
Read this thoroughly before you post any other deal with it shit.
1) I am not her to win at chess
2) I am not her to become better at chess
3) I am not hear to learn about chess
4) I am not hear explore games
5) I am not her to analyze chess
6) I am not her to visit the forum
There is one reason for me to create a chess.com account.
There is one reason why I log in to chess.com
Probably you have guessed it. It is becouse I want to spend time playing chess.
There a billion different games and sports out there, and the stupidity of how chess beats abandonment problem wins the first place every f**ing time.
Your oponent leaves, "feel free to hang around, yea and btw if you leave before the next five minutes we are gonna appoint your opponent the victor"
This is the internet. I dont give a s**t if you are having a heart attack, your mother (deleted by MOD), your house burning to the ground or one of the billion other legimate reasons for you to disconect.
I will never meet you, I will never see you, I will never talk to you and I will never care for you. What this means is, the list of things I would want you to do goes 1) Die violent in a car crash 2)abandon a halfway played position.
as I told you before we could be speaking one of the five other langues I master, and then we could be talking about spelling.
As for angermanagment Im not feeling angry, more suprised. I don't get why you dont get that given the choise between you leaving me hanging, and you falling down a stair and braking every single bone in you body I would always choose the later.
point being, why do you symphetise with the guys who cant spend one second to press the resign button?
mrhjornevik wrote:
right now my head is nearly bursting by your stupidority. A tearm describing how superior your stuid is!
Read this thoroughly before you post any other deal with it shit.
1) I am not her to win at chess
2) I am not her to become better at chess
3) I am not hear to learn about chess
4) I am not hear explore games
5) I am not her to analyze chess
6) I am not her to visit the forum
There is one reason for me to create a chess.com account.
There is one reason why I log in to chess.com
Probably you have guessed it. It is becouse I want to spend time playing chess.
There a billion different games and sports out there, and the stupidity of how chess beats abandonment problem wins the first place every f**ing time.
Your oponent leaves, "feel free to hang around, yea and btw if you leave before the next five minutes we are gonna appoint your opponent the victor"
This is the internet. I dont give a s**t if you are having a heart attack, your mother is being raped, your house burning to the ground or one of the billion other legimate reasons for you to disconect.
I will never meet you, I will never see you, I will never talk to you and I will never care for you. What this means is, the list of things I would want you to do goes 1) Die violent in a car crash 2)abandon a halfway played position.
And another wannabe pseudo intellectual is reported.
kaynight wrote:
Because....it.....is....in....the......rules.
yes the act of not resigning losing games and deliberatly allowing the time to run out is in the rules and against fair play policy. What is your point?
hey second. Which site rule did I break?
mrhjornevik wrote:
hey second. Which site rule did I break?
Its in the TOS which you read, when you joined chess.com
I_Am_Second wrote:
mrhjornevik wrote:
hey second. Which site rule did I break?
Its in the TOS which you read, when you joined chess.com
that is what I am asking about which of them did I break?
And it is nonsense, by the way. Insult me correctly if you do not mind.
Maybe he meant nonseance.