Proposed Vacation Abuse Solution
Sort:
in 5 month I'll go for 2 month vication... and I'm planing on few vications before... what will I do?
odiseas wrote: i think it's better let anyone to do his best. I use to take vacations 3 or 4 times a year, so I need 1 month, o sometimes, more.
Yea, I agree with this guy. I don't go on the computor some days and for the games with only One Day limits I will lose. I think that you could remove 24 hour move limits. Agreed?
RetGuvvie98 wrote: Loomis wrote:extracted from Loomis' post:
A tournament will easily take 2-3 months, I expect often longer. ...And what if the tournament goes a little longer than you expect?
... it's nonsense to expect everyone to play tournaments without a few of the participants taking a vacation.
I have to completely agree with Loomis, unforseen family emergencies might necessitate someone being 'offline' for a week during a tournament that might easily last six months. We call it 'vacation' time, for convenience of a common term to apply to 'taking a time out' where one does not have the obligation to make a move every 3 days (or other time control), but it could just as easily be a death in the family, traumatic car wreck injury, etc resulting in someone being unable to move for a week or two or possibly even longer. Those events would, of their very nature, be unplanned, unforseen, and unavoidable. That we lump all of them into the common term Vacation Time, may have been overlooked.
Let's not lose sight of the original post.
For a tournament where the time control is a move every 3 days, for 40 moves, it might take nearly 150 days and then, what about the game that goes 73 moves?? that could exceed a year in completing just one round. Possibly (hopefully) it won't take that long, but it could easily take longer..... How would one realistically plan to take no breaks for possibly 3 or more years if the event is 3 or 4 rounds?
Loomis is right on this point.
There are obviously going to be people on both sides of this issue and I think I will be in the majority camp. I dont understand why a few who want to take vacation should be allowed to inconvenience all those who probably will not? I think a solution might be to have tournaments of both kinds, some in which vacations are allowed and those which dont allow it. In this manner perhaps the vast majority would be pleased. As for how long a tourney might take, its certainly gonna take a LOT longer if people are allowed to go on vacations while the tourney is in progress. I used to take vacations in order to go play chess before I was retired so its hard for me to relate to "chessplayers" that want to take vacations to get away from playing chess. Now, with a 3 day/move time limit what sorta vacation might one take in which he/she couldnt access a computer once every 3 days and make a move anyway? I guess if you are camping in the outback somewhere and dont even have electricity or running water it could be a serious problem? I know everyone doesnt have lap tops and I guess not every town/city has an internet cafe or a public library with net access? Ok, so a tourney has 100 players and lets say 10 of them want to take vacation during the event, how many weeks or months might that add to everyone's schedule to finish the round/tourney? The way I would like to see it done those 10 of 100 would be inconvenienced and not allowed to take the vacation. The way you want it done would inconvenience 90. Ok, granted my numbers might be off some but I do feel that only a minority will want/expect to take vacations during a tourney in which they cannot or will not want to play chess. I am going on vacation in May to the US and I am in a tournament now. Its a 3 day/move time limit and has only added 4 games to my "load" currently. I will NOT have a problem finding an hour or 2 every 3 days to come to chess.com and make my moves in these games. I dont understand why its so big a problem for others either, maybe you can explain it to me? As for emergency situations, well if the emergency is so dire that one cannot do what I just described then it must be dire enough to just withdraw so the tourney can move on without them? Mind you, I will gladly "practice what I preach" and if such an emergency comes up for me I will just withdraw rather than inconvenience 100 people with my personal problems. Imagine having an event that may go a year or more as rev points out that has say 50 people wanting to take 2 weeks vacation at different times? How much more time does that add? Is it fair to those who do not do so? Anyway, it seems to me the best solution would be to have events of both types as I said earlier and let each player choose which they would prefer to play?
Reb> what sorta vacation might one take in which he/she couldnt access a computer once every 3 days and make a move anyway?
Someone posted they plan to attend a summer camp.
A few weeks ago I took an unexpected business trip. The first day I didn't have Internet access. The remainder of the week, I left for work around 7:30am and returned around 11:00pm. I could have played moves in my games, but it would have been a chore, and I doubt they would have been good moves.
Reb> Anyway, it seems to me the best solution would be to have events of both types as I said earlier and let each player choose which they would prefer to play?
USCF Correspondence Chess has flexible time controls, like "10 moves / 30 days", which allows people to take small vacations and business trips, without holding up the whole tournament. And yes, if that's not possible, letting TDs select whether (and how much) vacation is allowed sounds reasonable.
What happens when someone uses up the 40 days? Is that it forever? I like the idea of smaller blocks of vacation. For example you could give 40 (or more) days per year, but you can use 7 days in one month. Another idea is to have different vacation rules apply to tournaments. I think someone abusing vacation is way more annoying in tournaments because it's disrupts the excitement of the competition. If you're going on a 40 day vacation in 2 weeks, you shouldn't join a tournament anyway.
I think when serious unexpected emergencies come up, losing a few rating points on an internet chess site by timing out should be the least of your cares.
Maybe some people simply don't want to access a computer while on vacation, why would they necessarily want to? and if opponents can't wait several more days to make their move maybe Online 'Correspondence Chess' isn't for them.
Even when on vacation most people I know use the internet these days anyway....to check their email, if nothing else. We can keep arguing this point back and forth forever but I dont think anyone, in either camp, will be swayed to change their position simply because I know how chess players are. I think a reasonable solution would be to offer both types of tournies and let players choose which they prefer to play in.
that sounds great, can't wait till it starts.
I hate abuse because there are some people that dont know what responsibility is. I would eliminate vacation time all together or at least to certain parties. On one website you must win 5 games before you can join a tournament. In most companies you must be working for at least a year before you get vacation time. We must not let the younger generation think that vacationing comes at an easy expense.
I like a system where paying and accrual work in sync :
Basic members get only 1 vacation day per month provided he spent enough time online. Same getup for paying members but more vacation days per month.
And a system where players can trade vacation days for widgets, badges ( and a system whereby people can seek for these reputable citizens of online chess world to play with ).
I think this forum has been discussed to death ( this topic is a favorite ) - it's time to conduct a survey or a vote.
I agree with posters who think that it should be based on completed games and should still be a reasonably low number of days. Don't schedule games if you have to leave, and if something comes up and you have to leave town with a bunch of games going on, well, you have some vacation time built in there for that.
I don't think it should be a "reward" but rather a conservative amount of leeway for those who need it. Paying versus non-paying doesn't make much sense to me.
Erik, I think differential leave entitlement based on membership will tantamount to discrimination in playing conditions. After all, for genuine leave-takers, it is a requirement to take leave and ensures them fair playing conditions.
Your idea of accumulating leave with time is a great one, something like in corporates. Maybe you can give 1 day off for every 11 instead of 10. That will mean 33-34 leave plus the 5 initially...
Additionally, you may consider putting a cap on the max. balance available, to avoid misuse by old timers.
Apr 9, 2008
0
#117
feyterman wrote: i would like members to get more than 40 days vacation
So would Iit should be 2 months vacation
Zhane wrote: feyterman wrote: i would like members to get more than 40 days vacation
So would Iit should be 2 months vacation
Ridiculous !
Sounds good to me. People will always have things come up suddenly, but most of the time, you know when you're going on vacation. You can wrap up your games before this time period if you plan ahead. If you still need your online chess fix, there's always the live chess.
Keeping it at 20 days or so would seem fine to me, and the premium payers getting more would make sense.
Apr 9, 2008
0
#120
I like Erik's proposal as it is straight forward and easy for everyone to understand. Perhaps there could also be special arrangements for members who have built up a good reputation on the site, that they could apply for special circumstances to Erik (or the rest of the team) to have their vacation allowance extended to match the special circumstances (e.g long holiday etc etc)
Keep up the great work Erik... I love the site and your continued hard work to keep improving it! THANK YOU!
...if my opponent wants to blow his/her whole year's vacation to make me wait 43 days (or whatever) for the flag to drop, what's it to me? I've got lots of games to play, forums to read, etc., etc., in the meantime. It's not like anyone is limited to playing a maximum number of simultaneous games, so what's the problem?
frankly, the problem is tournaments. one person can hold up an entire event, inconveniencing hundreds of people.
Ofcourse in a tournament taking vacation should NOT be allowed. Vacations are planned events (normally) and if you are going to go on vacation soon then do not enter a tournament, simple. As for some "emergency" coming up then you simply have to "withdraw" from the tournament. Is withdrawing an option? As Erik points out, one or two taking vacation (for whatever reason) may inconvenience a hundred or more....
I think most of us know Tournaments can take several months maybe up to a year to play out if multiple rounds. So vacation in Tournaments for me, for sure. This is Online 'Correspondence Chess' if we are playing 3 days for 1 move these games / Tournaments are going to take weeks, several months regardless.