Thank you for your idea on this interesting system. However, for the moment you can use the "Contact" link to report a case of intentional vacation abuse and it will be handled appropriately.
vacation ad infinitum
Sort:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
Feb 1, 2009
0
#4
Beelzebub666 wrote:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
What about those of us who become very busy with exams, or have campus internet that is not always as reliable as we might like? I am paying for a premium membership in part for auto vacation protection, and I don't want any games that someone else thinks I'm losing in ended because I couldn't log on to chess.com for 24 hours.
My scholastic experience included lots of exam at the bachelor and grad level, not to mention preparing for the certification exam. Those are controllable timing. For instance, the National exam took about a week but I knew when it will happen. I knew how much preparation I need, and apportioned my time accordingly; less partying, less outing, less tv, less chess, etc. At the college level, same thing, same strategy. So I would not compare college needs with disability needs.. there is no comparison.
Feb 1, 2009
0
#6
drmr4vrmr wrote:
My scholastic experience included lots of exam at the bachelor and grad level, not to mention preparing for the certification exam. Those are controllable timing. For instance, the National exam took about a week but I knew when it will happen. I knew how much preparation I need, and apportioned my time accordingly; less partying, less outing, less tv, less chess, etc. At the college level, same thing, same strategy. So I would not compare college needs with disability needs.. there is no comparison.
I can't always control when I need to spend a week-end studying, or when the campus internet goes down.
I'm not comparing my situation to disability needs - not at all. What I'm saying is that I have never (and never will) abuse the auto timeout protection, but I want to have it there in case I need it.
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
What about those of us who become very busy with exams, or have campus internet that is not always as reliable as we might like? I am paying for a premium membership in part for auto vacation protection, and I don't want any games that someone else thinks I'm losing in ended because I couldn't log on to chess.com for 24 hours.
You're asking 'what if i've signed up for a move every 24 hours when i can't make a move every 24 hours'. Sign up for longer move limits. If you have unreliable internet, or just get busy, that's your problem not mine. If you accept a game with 24 hour limits and cannot meet them you should lose on time. That is the whole point of the limit.
Feb 1, 2009
0
#8
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
What about those of us who become very busy with exams, or have campus internet that is not always as reliable as we might like? I am paying for a premium membership in part for auto vacation protection, and I don't want any games that someone else thinks I'm losing in ended because I couldn't log on to chess.com for 24 hours.
You're asking 'what if i've signed up for a move every 24 hours when i can't make a move every 24 hours'. Sign up for longer move limits. If you have unreliable internet, or just get busy, that's your problem not mine. If you accept a game with 24 hour limits and cannot meet them you should lose on time. That is the whole point of the limit.
So if I join 2 tournaments, say, then 2 months later, go on vacation for a week, you think I should lose every game I am playing? Perhaps you'll be interested to know I'm not the type to use my Vacation all the time - in fact I almost never use it - but if the auto timeout protection was taken away, I would end my paying membership, and get my money back.
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
What about those of us who become very busy with exams, or have campus internet that is not always as reliable as we might like? I am paying for a premium membership in part for auto vacation protection, and I don't want any games that someone else thinks I'm losing in ended because I couldn't log on to chess.com for 24 hours.
You're asking 'what if i've signed up for a move every 24 hours when i can't make a move every 24 hours'. Sign up for longer move limits. If you have unreliable internet, or just get busy, that's your problem not mine. If you accept a game with 24 hour limits and cannot meet them you should lose on time. That is the whole point of the limit.
So if I join 2 tournaments, say, then 2 months later, go on vacation for a week, you think I should lose every game I am playing? Perhaps you'll be interested to know I'm not the type to use my Vacation all the time - in fact I almost never use it - but if the auto timeout protection was taken away, I would end my paying membership, and get my money back.
No, that would be what vacation time is for - vacation. Unless you claim to have surprise vacations, you have sufficient time to take 5 seconds and go and click the vacation box. So we can dismiss that transparent attempt at obfuscation and get back to automatic vacation abuse.
What you suggested is that you need auto timeout protection in case you just can't get to a game within the agreed limits, because your connection is unreliable or you are just busy. In either case it's your problem which you pass on to your opponent through the automatic vacation abuse.
Feb 1, 2009
0
#10
I live in Costa Rica. I've had several times where my internet was unreliable for three days. I've also had times where friends do show up, and we take "surprise vacation." Travel is easy and cheap here, so it does happen. Logging into chess.com to click the vacation button is not on my priority list at those times. I understand that a month of vacation time can be a lot, but I did pay a lot for my membership. I also understand that in tournaments this can be an issue, so yes, there should be an option to turn it off. If you absolutely can't wait for your opponent in an online chess game, though, start a new game. Really, outside of tournaments, I can't understand why this is such a big deal.
If you commit to a game and are later unable to fulfill that commitment, then you should lose, regardless of whether you are a premium member or not.
If school, work, family, vacation, a medical emergency, etc. interfere with your ability to complete your games, you have given priority to them. Losing a chess game shouldn't be a very big deal in comparison.
On the first tournament here at chess.com, I was winning roughly 80% of my games. Then I have to go on vacation, but dont know how to activate the vacation option. Needless to say I lost the rest of the games. So now I could not join some tournaments because of it.
On the second sets of tournament I am on now, I learned, courtesy of other players how to activate the vacation option. Consequently, I am winning all my games so far, except 2. I activated the vacation for my trip to the mountain where no internet and cell phone service is available. I was back about 4 days later and resumed my games.
So... you decide.
So
Feb 1, 2009
0
#13
Having to wait an extra day or even week or (even month, for that matter!) for someone to return from 'vacation' or wherever should also not be a very big deal in comparison. It's all about point of view. The point of chess is the game, and, especially in correspondence games, should not be about time. If you feel the auto vacation is being abused, sure, report it, but if the person is honestly unable to make it to their computer in time, then give em a break.
I DO NOT MIND AT ALL IF MY OPPONENT KEEPS ON HAVING A VACATION OR IS IN AUTO VACATION, I JUST WAIT AND MAKE MY MOVE. JUST HAVE SOME PATIENCE. IT IS ONE OF THE PREMIUM MEMBERS PRIVILEGES. IN ANY CASE, THEIR VACATION WILL EVENTUALLY RUN OUT.
so is this guy infinitum stalling im playing him too.
Feb 2, 2009
0
#16
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
What about those of us who become very busy with exams, or have campus internet that is not always as reliable as we might like? I am paying for a premium membership in part for auto vacation protection, and I don't want any games that someone else thinks I'm losing in ended because I couldn't log on to chess.com for 24 hours.
You're asking 'what if i've signed up for a move every 24 hours when i can't make a move every 24 hours'. Sign up for longer move limits. If you have unreliable internet, or just get busy, that's your problem not mine. If you accept a game with 24 hour limits and cannot meet them you should lose on time. That is the whole point of the limit.
So if I join 2 tournaments, say, then 2 months later, go on vacation for a week, you think I should lose every game I am playing? Perhaps you'll be interested to know I'm not the type to use my Vacation all the time - in fact I almost never use it - but if the auto timeout protection was taken away, I would end my paying membership, and get my money back.
No, that would be what vacation time is for - vacation. Unless you claim to have surprise vacations, you have sufficient time to take 5 seconds and go and click the vacation box. So we can dismiss that transparent attempt at obfuscation and get back to automatic vacation abuse.
What you suggested is that you need auto timeout protection in case you just can't get to a game within the agreed limits, because your connection is unreliable or you are just busy. In either case it's your problem which you pass on to your opponent through the automatic vacation abuse.
Heh, irony is great, isn't it. About 4 hours after my last post, my laptop died; I'll be without it for 2-3 weeks. Should I have to be constantly on vacation, in case I get access at the school library every 26 hours, as opposed to the 24-hour limits? Is it not better for everyone if my vacation only kicks in for 30-40 mins on the odd day I need it?
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
What about those of us who become very busy with exams, or have campus internet that is not always as reliable as we might like? I am paying for a premium membership in part for auto vacation protection, and I don't want any games that someone else thinks I'm losing in ended because I couldn't log on to chess.com for 24 hours.
You're asking 'what if i've signed up for a move every 24 hours when i can't make a move every 24 hours'. Sign up for longer move limits. If you have unreliable internet, or just get busy, that's your problem not mine. If you accept a game with 24 hour limits and cannot meet them you should lose on time. That is the whole point of the limit.
So if I join 2 tournaments, say, then 2 months later, go on vacation for a week, you think I should lose every game I am playing? Perhaps you'll be interested to know I'm not the type to use my Vacation all the time - in fact I almost never use it - but if the auto timeout protection was taken away, I would end my paying membership, and get my money back.
No, that would be what vacation time is for - vacation. Unless you claim to have surprise vacations, you have sufficient time to take 5 seconds and go and click the vacation box. So we can dismiss that transparent attempt at obfuscation and get back to automatic vacation abuse.
What you suggested is that you need auto timeout protection in case you just can't get to a game within the agreed limits, because your connection is unreliable or you are just busy. In either case it's your problem which you pass on to your opponent through the automatic vacation abuse.
Heh, irony is great, isn't it. About 4 hours after my last post, my laptop died; I'll be without it for 2-3 weeks. Should I have to be constantly on vacation, in case I get access at the school library every 26 hours, as opposed to the 24-hour limits? Is it not better for everyone if my vacation only kicks in for 30-40 mins on the odd day I need it?
How convenient to your argument. If you cannot reach a 24 hour game once in every 24 hours you should apologise and resign. What do you think is the purpose of the 24 hour limit? A general guideline?
Feb 2, 2009
0
#18
Why should I be forced to resign several games when I had absolutely no reason to ever suspect meeting a 24-hour dealine would be an issue, and I'll at most be 3 hours after my time would have expired? Especially since I, in all likelyhood, won't miss the deadlines at all, but if it weren't for auto-timeout (which I pay for), I'd have to use ALL of my remaining vacation time, just in case the library computers are all busy when I arrive.
SensFan33 wrote:
Why should I be forced to resign several games when I had absolutely no reason to ever suspect meeting a 24-hour dealine would be an issue, and I'll at most be 3 hours after my time would have expired? Especially since I, in all likelyhood, won't miss the deadlines at all, but if it weren't for auto-timeout (which I pay for), I'd have to use ALL of my remaining vacation time, just in case the library computers are all busy when I arrive.
Which brings us back to my initial point, you think your problem should become your opponent's problem. Extending your move times past the limits you agreed to play to is not what vacation time is for, it is for vacation time. The time limits are not a general guideline, they are the time limits. And i'm guessing without auto vacation abuse to fall back on you would miss fewer deadlines.
Feb 2, 2009
0
#20
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
SensFan33 wrote:
Beelzebub666 wrote:
"An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players."
I second this, if you are too ill to commit to playing normally, you should make your potential opponents aware of the fact.
What about those of us who become very busy with exams, or have campus internet that is not always as reliable as we might like? I am paying for a premium membership in part for auto vacation protection, and I don't want any games that someone else thinks I'm losing in ended because I couldn't log on to chess.com for 24 hours.
You're asking 'what if i've signed up for a move every 24 hours when i can't make a move every 24 hours'. Sign up for longer move limits. If you have unreliable internet, or just get busy, that's your problem not mine. If you accept a game with 24 hour limits and cannot meet them you should lose on time. That is the whole point of the limit.
So if I join 2 tournaments, say, then 2 months later, go on vacation for a week, you think I should lose every game I am playing? Perhaps you'll be interested to know I'm not the type to use my Vacation all the time - in fact I almost never use it - but if the auto timeout protection was taken away, I would end my paying membership, and get my money back.
No, that would be what vacation time is for - vacation. Unless you claim to have surprise vacations, you have sufficient time to take 5 seconds and go and click the vacation box. So we can dismiss that transparent attempt at obfuscation and get back to automatic vacation abuse.
What you suggested is that you need auto timeout protection in case you just can't get to a game within the agreed limits, because your connection is unreliable or you are just busy. In either case it's your problem which you pass on to your opponent through the automatic vacation abuse.
Heh, irony is great, isn't it. About 4 hours after my last post, my laptop died; I'll be without it for 2-3 weeks. Should I have to be constantly on vacation, in case I get access at the school library every 26 hours, as opposed to the 24-hour limits? Is it not better for everyone if my vacation only kicks in for 30-40 mins on the odd day I need it?
How convenient to your argument. If you cannot reach a 24 hour game once in every 24 hours you should apologise and resign. What do you think is the purpose of the 24 hour limit? A general guideline?
If vacation time is permitted within that game, why should an apology be made? If still playing entirely within the rules and not intending to abuse vacation time, then what is the problem? Maybe an explanation to your opponent may be a sporting gesture. Perhaps changing your status ('offline-technical difficulties') is easier. RESIGN???? The game is surely for enjoyment more than a few easy ratings points gained by your opponent resigning.
This topic seems to have taken a life of its own. So here's my suggestions to hopefully address the issue objectively.
I think there should be an arbitrage group. i.e. active members of say 24. when an abuse appears as described by you whiteR... then you can submit a complaint. This group can then review the board (material, time, position) and if the appears to be in your favor then the abuse is adjudged probable and a win is accorded to you by majority rule. The arbitrade group must vote within 24 hours, and the decision is final. Chess.com then awards the point. That I think should eliminate this problem.
I have used vacation once. I like it because I make frequent travel to remote places that does not provide internet access.
An issue raised dwelt upon auto vacation. It is alleged that people with disability prefer this because of reduced physical and mental endurance. I suggested that a special group or club be created for them and play there instead of subjecting others into the interminable auto vacations which apparently stresses a lot of players.
Can Eric address this issue?