Thank you, Reb. I was mainly frustrated that until this point, the point of the non-cheaters being impacted by the rule had gone, seemingly, unnoticed and unmatched. I do agree that the case of abuse happens ridiculously more often than an honest vacation. It can be mildly annoying. We obviously disagree on which is the lesser of two evils, but I am now glad to let it rest. It doesn't really impact me either way. I don't care if somebody tries to stall a loss because I'll win eventually, and I have no use for the vacation feature at all. I don't usually play more than a game or two at a time(with the current exception of Sprite's Tournament).
vacation rule unfair
Sort:
wow ... that was a long read ... pity about sstteevveenn's idea not being a feasible solution. thought it was a good one.
that's all :P
For me the vacation rule is not a problem. If one of my opponents goes on vacation because they are losing, no problem, they just drag it out for themselves and risk never playing a person from whom they might be able to learn and improve from again.
Maybe a change in the rules would be helpful to some, how about instead of being able to take ALL your vacation time all at once, why not split it into sections, say, only able to take 5 vacation days at one time out of the 1 month 9 days, then you have to make a move. Then go on vacation again etc. Whist this may drag the game out I think it would help those who are one or two moves away from checkmating their opponents.
Red
Dec 23, 2007
0
#65
Well - I'll add my view. Basically I agree with liammor.
I also had to make some moves quickly because I need to take a brief vacation. No big problem but a pity to have to rush it.
My view is if someone abuses vacation time then it's them who lose out - they have less vacation time & aren't playing chess when they could be. Their opponent just has to wait for them to come back, enjoy the victory when it comes & remember never to play them again if that's their view. Also anyone taking unnecessary vacation time will soon leave the site as
- they're not really interested in playing &
- they'll have no time for vacation soon
The rest of us can get on with enjoying the site.
Merry Xmas everyone, Chris
Jan 4, 2008
0
#66
yes, a long read indeed. i just wanted to say that it would be a pity if lower ranked players never got the chance to play you, Reb, simply because there are some people out there who dont have much courtesy. its a shame i will probably never get the chance to learn from a game against you.
Jan 4, 2008
0
#67
Matalino, you are missing the point. That's not what people are complaining about. The complaints that we were getting were that people would set their vacation status to on each time they left their computer (stopping their clock in all their games.) Then the next time they wanted to make some moves, they'd come back to their computer, turn off vacation, and then ONLY move in games where they were winning, then turn vacation status back on. This means all the games where they had a losing position, their opponents were forced to wait upwards of 40 days to get their wins. By forcing them to move in every game, they have to continue to make moves in ALL games, not just the ones where they are winning.
i have used my vacation time when my computer is on the blink and the shop says 3-4 weeks. i think thats because my pc is under warranty. ive lost some games because of time. so what i did was go on vacation till my pc gets fixed.
Thats a good point Jay,
That of course takes us back to my recommendation I made some time ago... that the initial vacation request should not be hindered by the need to make a move in all games. Vacation abusers go on and off vacation (at least this seems to be the most annoying form of it), whereas an honest vacationer usually goes on and then resumes playing all games when they come back.
To me it is not really a big deal, I go on vacation once... maybe twice a year. It's no sweat off my back to follow the rules as they are laid out. But I can see how it hurts people carrying a higher number of games.
I take very little time in deciding my moves - that might account for my rating- but if one has too many games in play it could affect how one thinks, knowing that there are lots more games waiting. Every knows (or should know) what they're comfortable with, so play with this in mind. No problem with vacation rules for me, haven't encountered them yet!
Matalino wrote: jay wrote: Matalino, you are missing the point. That's not what people are complaining about. The complaints that we were getting were that people would set their vacation status to on each time they left their computer (stopping their clock in all their games.) Then the next time they wanted to make some moves, they'd come back to their computer, turn off vacation, and then ONLY move in games where they were winning, then turn vacation status back on. This means all the games where they had a losing position, their opponents were forced to wait upwards of 40 days to get their wins. By forcing them to move in every game, they have to continue to make moves in ALL games, not just the ones where they are winning.
The gist of this whole thing is that "opponents were forced to wait upwards of 40 days to get their wins".
I still don't get it. The complainer of Vacation Abuse gets his win 30 days later or 10 days earlier if a vacationer gets his vacation in incements of 4 days each.
With the vacation rule in place, all those who have been complaining Vacation Abuse will all still have to wait until the vacationer comes back from vacation.
What I can't understand is why punish the entire chess community for the infractions of a selected few?
Why not simply place a FLAG on the selected few who take small increments of their vacation AND not making a move in all their games. And spare me and many of us, meaning that the selected few and only the selected few with a FLAG would only be the ones affected by the current vacation rule and spare the rest of us from it.
I dont see how anyone is being "punished" by the new rules myself. I also dont see but a very few whining about it so to suggest the entire community is being "punished is simply hogwash. Matalino, you currently have 17 games going and your highest rated opponent is 400 points below you ! Please explain to me why it would be so difficult for you to make a move in all 17 games before going on vacation? I really dont get it at all. However thats a nice way to pad your rating and I am thinking of doing the same thing if it works out well for you. 
Matalino, please explain to me how is it punishing anyone to have them make a move in all games before going on vacation? This new rule also means when they do come back and make a move in one game they must move in all games which the abusers werent doing. They were moving only in games they werent losing then going back on vacation. I had over 50 games going at one point here and it wasnt hard to move in all my games every day. Why would it be hard for me to do so before going on vacation? Like me, you are retired so it should be just as easy for you to make moves in all your games before going on vacation. Whats the problem?
Jan 5, 2008
0
#73
Also, the way I see it. The ability to stop your clock and have all your opponents wait for you while you Go on vacation is an added privilege, a bonus. The fact that we ask you to just make a move first before leaving for vacation is not asking too much in my mind. After all, we could just remove vacationing altogether.
Jan 5, 2008
0
#74
Great idea! Premium Chess.com members can go on vacation whenever they please, without making all moves in all their chess games. We're rolling out our premium memberships very soon, so this is one perk we will look into adding.
Simply flagging users who have been accused of abusing is not so simple, because whether or not someone is abusing their vacation is almost a subjective issue, that requires lots of time by an admin to investigate abuse claims to try and determine if it appears they are abusing it, when they last made moves in all their games, when they last left on vacation and came back, etc etc. It becomes a he said she said issue.
Matalino wrote: jay wrote: Also, the way I see it. The ability to stop your clock and have all your opponents wait for you while you Go on vacation is an added privilege, a bonus. The fact that we ask you to just make a move first before leaving for vacation is not asking too much in my mind. After all, we could just remove vacationing altogether.
Indeed it is. Indeed it is a bonus, a privilege.
But if this website wishes to later have paying membership, this website cannot afford to remove this privilege of giving members vacation. Without a vacation privilege many would not care to pay membership.
And it is a prime consideration of all businesses to always be FAIR with its public. Public Relations require that anything and everything that is negative, particularly complaints of unfairness, has to be addressed and resolved.
No business will ever succeed if it is ever tainted no matter how small with being unfair to its public.
To be fair to those who voiced Vacation Unfair in this forum, this website needs to apply its "Vacation Rule" to only the people and only the people who are accused of "Vacation Abuse".
WHINE WHINE WHINE DO YOU LIKE CHEESE WITH YOUR WHINE? 
"Great idea! Premium Chess.com members can go on vacation whenever they please, without making all moves in all their chess games. We're rolling out our premium memberships very soon, so this is one perk we will look into adding."
You are kidding! right?
Matalino,
I've tried both sets of rules that have been implemented here and found both to be satisfactory (although I have a slight preference for the present vacation rules). My comment refers to the idea that paying and non-paying members would abide by different rules... this hardly seems fair or democratic, does it? The word "elitism" springs to mind. I just sought confirmation that this wouldn't be the case... and I had that, I think. I don't really care what the final solution is, as long as it is the same for everyone.
i think vacation rule has its advantages and disadvantages like for example, you need ample time to review your moves.
but then..
there are some annoying people, who can be s0-called un sportsman who takes advantage of the vacation rule, to messed up with their hostiles.
hope that, they accept defeat honorably rather than a won game thru cheat.. :)
King William,
my post looks a little out of context now, because Matalino deleted one of his posts, which would have been between #107 and #108. In the missing post I was asked "what's your beef?"... the present #108 is my response.
"Ray the fact of the matter is that money buys (more) privileges... "
Yes, I agree (remember the OJ Simpson trial?)...but that doesn't dismiss our desire to improve upon the mistakes of the past.
If the paying customers do not to play by the same vacation rules, then trouble can't be far behind. Privilege is one thing, being above the rules quite another.
If you go on vacation in order to get more time to reflect on your moves, as the initiator of this thread (if I understand him correctly) writes he did, then he was attempting to use vacation time to exceed the time limit. Losing a game as a result seems appropriate.
The current vacation rule is just fine.
Robert I wasn't trying to go on vacation in order to get more time to reflect on my moves I was trying to go on vacation because I didn't have the time to play at all for a few days, due to work commitments. When I tried to go on vacation none of my games where close to timing out, the closest (I think) being a day or two off timing out. However I couldn't play for 4 days. 2 out of 14 of my active games subsequently timed out in those four days. I didn't look at those games at all during those four days as I was busy.
Yes I could have logged on for a few minutes and made moves in the games closest to timing out (one of which I was winning comfortably against a less strong player, the other was against a stronger player but was even in my opinion, both my opponent and I had a bishop & rook and 5 or 6 pawns). I feel making a quick move wouldn't have made too much difference in the first game. In the second game however making a rushed and probally poor move would have cost me the game - exactly as timing out did. Which was a pity as it had been a good game.
Anyway, my only point in starting this thread is that I feel the rule that states that you must have no outstanding moves in any games, a rule that was brought in because of those few individuals who abuse the vacation facility in order to delay defeat, gain more thinking time or just wind up their opponents, actually penalises the genuine players who like to make full use of the site by playing many games.
I have now cut the number of games I play at any one time because of this rule; meaning less chess for me
. Okay no big deal really. But why should I have to do this because someone else abuses the system?
Thanks for the info Jay about the practicalities (or not as the case is) of sstteevveennss suggestion. I don't know what you and the other moderators (is that the correct term?) think or have planned but having read all the posts I feel there's a strong argument to scrap the rule totally. Good luck whatever you decide though.