12184 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I'm sure that some people abuse their priveleges, but for some of us who have daily connection and power problems the 'vacation protection' is a godsend - I've lost two games in a 'no vacation' tournament on time-outs, not because I didn't want to move or had managed my time badly, but simply because I was unable to get on the net. We doesn't all live in a world where everythin' work perfectly all the time
I agree "vacation protection" is a godsend for situations we have no control over; like illness and connectivity problems of which I have had both. If we have abuse: we should clearly identify it and have an escalating means of stopping the persons involved.
I say address the abuse effectively.
I didn't realise I was going to run out of time, then remembered about 3 hours too late. But I'm a premium member, so I was saved. I felt a bit bad.
So imagine how I felt when my opponent (not a premium member) then lost on time himself, when he had what was arguably a winning position?!
I felt really bad!
Well, there goes the argument that premium vacation protection does NOT give any advantage in game play.....
I wouldn't call this abuse unless it was very repeated.
I'm one of those that believes in free will, live-and-let-live and a little fun. I guess that you're one of those that prefers telling others what to do? sure seems like it.
I believe in free will as well, but I also believe in personal responsiblity and being held accountable when you act like a jerk. It appears that you prefer that there be no consequences for breaking the rules. Fortunately, it appears that those who run the site don't share your preference.
Where have I said that? please quote me.
(Now who's joining in? I love it when a plan comes together..... Mr. Above-it-all scrapping in the dust now, with the rest of us mangy dawgs. ).
Not if it is documented repeated abuse.
Of course if this site was actually run on the preferences and interpertations of the complainers it would also be much smaller.
I've never gotten the message. In addition I'm still waiting for a definition of completely and hopelessly lost.
bsrasmus wrote: Perhaps they have added the message since you have gone on vacation the last time. As for the definition: you don't need a definition. It's clear what they mean. And they don't have to explain themselves to anyone. But you could consult Websters if it still seems unclear.
A game that is completely and hopelessly lost = the point at which someone ought to resign.
bsrasmus wrote: I would say "could" rather than "ought to". But that sounds reasonable.
And since there's almost universal consensus on the appropriate point at which to resign, the issue is resolved.
I "could" resign here.
You have a different definition of could?
Me personally? I'm looking forward to the "Vacation Abuse Arbitration is Unfair" thread.
I never said that I, or anyone else, would oppose the rule itself, but the subjectivity of it's application.
Suppose someone falls ill and has a game arbitrated in their opponent's favour after my timeout protection kicks in. Suppose that the arbitrator mis-interpreted their position and it was not in fact "Completely and Hopelessly Lost" (such as one in which a material advantage falls to strong drawing chances), or that they mis-interpret their position and post such a thread because of that.
In any case, I think that while this rule may be written, it's not really enforced except in extreme cases where there can be little question as to the nature of the abuse. I suspect that the pop-up you keep pasting into these forums is placed where it is for a reason -- to serve as a pre-emptive deterrent because the punitive side doesn't really exist.
It would probably be a good idea to have date-stamped moves so that moves one month apart stand out clearly.
what-is-vacation-abuse?page=2 post #28
Vacation abuse is largely a state of mind.
It doesn't really matter if there is a consensus, though, since the members don't arbitrate. The arbitrators (the staff) decide when the position is completely and hopelessly lost. In order to obey the rules, each of us must use our best judgment in deciding whether or not we are trying to use vacation time to drag out a game that is hopelessly lost . A small dose of common sense should do the trick.
ie the staff rewrites the rules of chess to suit a vocal few who cannot abide the current rules.
12/5/2013 - Too Many Attackers, Too Little Defenders
by savanjasani 7 minutes ago
I can't switch to a new email adress
by kohai 8 minutes ago
what the #$%^was he playing and how did he win?
by Jaglavak 26 minutes ago
Autoplay the only SINGLE move option
by DavidStyles 29 minutes ago
is this player better then Magnus
by varelse1 34 minutes ago
Resign repeated times
by Bur_Oak 39 minutes ago
QG - Tarrasch vs Albin Counter Gambit
by bresando 41 minutes ago
Novag Citrine and Arena GUI
by NigelNice 44 minutes ago
Positional response to e4?
by Yaroslavl 61 minutes ago
what is this whole "carlsen plays like a computer" nonsense
by kco 62 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!