Submitted by sollevy10 on Thu, 06/16/2011 at 8:20pm.
I am actively participating now in Vote Chess. I just realized that this game offers not just the game but in a large part socializing as well. You would be able to meet real enthusiastic chess players all over the word, like these members below.
Vote Chess is administered by different groups forming teams whose members usually discuss a move before voting. During discussions, members become friends and some end in heated arguments which is just natural - you know, just like FB.
Since teams are involved in vote chess, there are responsible leaders who organize groups and teams like these::
Leadership and responsibility however do not always translate to good sportsmanship when it comes to the issue of when to resign?
Group leaders or Admins should not let their team play games that are completely lost because:
1. they are not just wasting the time of their team members but also of the opposing team.
2. the Admins are supposed to be leaders and should educate their members about respect of the game, courtesy, and fairplay.
3. this is supposed to be a family-oriented online game which therefore requires that leaders should always set as examples to the team because young minds look up to them for their lead and adapt to the standards they are setting.
A game by our group has the position shown below. The opponent continues to play despite the overwhelming advantage for several moves already. This is unsportsmanlike-conduct in chess. However, after a friendly alert to the losing group's Super-Admin, the opponents agreed to finally resign. That's another good thing about having leaders like those in the picture.
Username sollevy10 is an active Admin and blogger of The Unit, a chess.com group actively participating in Vote Chess games, guided Team Matches and in organizing tournaments. The Unit is looking to expand its membership and encourages every chess.com member to join. Please click link: for more information. A Message from Uniteer, Super-Admin of The Unit
FBRogge, thanks for you insightful comments. i think the community of vote chess players on this site, particularly the admins of groups, should also form a group of arbiters among them to ensure that their members are protected from incidents like this and that each game is a quality chess game. A teammate of mine said the cochrane gambit would not be successful in vote chess. however, from our observation here, even the parham attack has a potential to end a vote chess game in Scholar's Mate.
If I may add to your suggestion FBR, every game challenge should specify the minimum number of votes per move, that if an opposing group falls short of that agreed minimimum number of votes, the game is automatically forfeited. This way, members of a large group are ensured that the opposing team is equally large and not one chess beginner opposing 26 members. i have to stop here because this is now getting funny... and i'm beginning to laugh, imagine 26 vote team members seriously deliberating a move against one 1200 player.
Absurd! Anyway, White can certainly not be suspected to have used computer help... Also, Black could play Bh4+ at the 4th move already. 9.Nd2?? (why not simply 9.Bxd8) is rather strange. Unimaginable that two or more voters would agree about this. I think White is fighting alone against a whole army of voters!
It looks like some kind of adjudication by an arbiter is desirable, to finish such useless games.
Every version of chess on this site has its own flavour... First time I tried vote chess, it was one of the big games, with hundred of members per team. It was terrible, with so many as no one could agree on anything, lots of name calling, and people trying to cheat at every step, joining both sides etc... I almost quit vote chess right there. I've also found games that have no comments at all and you simply vote and thats it. Quite boring.
However, team Canada has opened me up to a much more rewarding version of vote chess, with dedicated members, leaders, good discussion, and people generally following the rules. The Unit is also good. These teams make me appreciate vote chess and will continue to help out on these teams. Its more fun to hear their views and comments than solo chess only, and you learn more too!
On the original topic, you're never entitled to your opponent resigning. So if they don't... you gotta tough if out and not get angry. Thats just the nature of them game and you can still learn or enjoy games that are lopesided if you try!
See you out in the field sollevy, I'll take you up on those blitz games sometime (if you promise not to beat me too badly!)
i used to think that the burden on the issue of when to resign lies on the winning opponent - that is, the winner must have all the patience to wait until the loser decides to resign. However, in VC it is different because there are supposed to be leaders and leaders know the value of sportsmanship.
i know, i sound too righteous in this blog, but this is not for me. this is for my team and for all the Vote Chess players. this also for the members of this site to know that there is VOTE CHESS they have to experience as well because it is fun, makes you learn more about the game, and meet other members as well.
right, c.o.c.? and thanks for leaving a comment. see you in our games.
I was going to join this game, but saw you guys had it well in hand. Sometimes I enjoy destroying an opponent that wont quit when its hopeless by refusing to checkmate them until I've taken every piece but their king. Its my way of pushing them towards resigning next time.
Vote Chess: When is the Best Time to Resign
I am actively participating now in Vote Chess. I just realized that this game offers not just the game but in a large part socializing as well. You would be able to meet real enthusiastic chess players all over the word, like these members below.
Vote Chess is administered by different groups forming teams whose members usually discuss a move before voting. During discussions, members become friends
and some end in heated arguments 
which is just natural - you know, just like FB.
Since teams are involved in vote chess, there are responsible leaders who organize groups and teams like these::
Leadership and responsibility however do not always translate to good sportsmanship when it comes to the issue of when to resign?
Group leaders or Admins should not let their team play games that are completely lost because:
1. they are not just wasting the time of their team members but also of the opposing team.
2. the Admins are supposed to be leaders and should educate their members about respect of the game, courtesy, and fairplay.
3. this is supposed to be a family-oriented online game which therefore requires that leaders should always set as examples to the team because young minds look up to them for their lead and adapt to the standards they are setting.
A game by our group has the position shown below. The opponent continues to play despite the overwhelming advantage for several moves already. This is unsportsmanlike-conduct in chess. However, after a friendly alert to the losing group's Super-Admin, the opponents agreed to finally resign. That's another good thing about having leaders like those in the picture.
Comments:
Canada
Member Points: 1237
FBRogge, thanks for you insightful comments. i think the community of vote chess players on this site, particularly the admins of groups, should also form a group of arbiters among them to ensure that their members are protected from incidents like this and that each game is a quality chess game. A teammate of mine said the cochrane gambit would not be successful in vote chess. however, from our observation here, even the parham attack has a potential to end a vote chess game in Scholar's Mate.
If I may add to your suggestion FBR, every game challenge should specify the minimum number of votes per move, that if an opposing group falls short of that agreed minimimum number of votes, the game is automatically forfeited. This way, members of a large group are ensured that the opposing team is equally large and not one chess beginner opposing 26 members. i have to stop here because this is now getting funny... and i'm beginning to laugh, imagine 26 vote team members seriously deliberating a move against one 1200 player.
International
Member Points: 45
Absurd!
Anyway, White can certainly not be suspected to have used computer help... Also, Black could play Bh4+ at the 4th move already. 9.Nd2?? (why not simply 9.Bxd8) is rather strange. Unimaginable that two or more voters would agree about this. I think White is fighting alone against a whole army of voters! 
It looks like some kind of adjudication by an arbiter is desirable, to finish such useless games.
Calgary Canada
Member Points: 363
Every version of chess on this site has its own flavour... First time I tried vote chess, it was one of the big games, with hundred of members per team. It was terrible, with so many as no one could agree on anything, lots of name calling, and people trying to cheat at every step, joining both sides etc... I almost quit vote chess right there. I've also found games that have no comments at all and you simply vote and thats it. Quite boring.
However, team Canada has opened me up to a much more rewarding version of vote chess, with dedicated members, leaders, good discussion, and people generally following the rules. The Unit is also good. These teams make me appreciate vote chess and will continue to help out on these teams. Its more fun to hear their views and comments than solo chess only, and you learn more too!
On the original topic, you're never entitled to your opponent resigning. So if they don't... you gotta tough if out and not get angry. Thats just the nature of them game and you can still learn or enjoy games that are lopesided if you try!
See you out in the field sollevy, I'll take you up on those blitz games sometime (if you promise not to beat me too badly!)
Canada
Member Points: 1237
i used to think that the burden on the issue of when to resign lies on the winning opponent - that is, the winner must have all the patience to wait until the loser decides to resign. However, in VC it is different because there are supposed to be leaders and leaders know the value of sportsmanship.
i know, i sound too righteous in this blog, but this is not for me. this is for my team and for all the Vote Chess players. this also for the members of this site to know that there is VOTE CHESS they have to experience as well because it is fun, makes you learn more about the game, and meet other members as well.
right, c.o.c.? and thanks for leaving a comment. see you in our games.
Calgary Canada
Member Points: 363
I was going to join this game, but saw you guys had it well in hand. Sometimes I enjoy destroying an opponent that wont quit when its hopeless by refusing to checkmate them until I've taken every piece but their king. Its my way of pushing them towards resigning next time.