Is Auto-vacation for paid users unfair?

Just so you know if a premium member signs up for a "no vacation" tournament and it goes beyond their alloted days it DOES time out same as a non premium.

Yes, I know.

So my point here is that if you whiney ass whingers don't want people to go on auto vacation then they know the answer. Sometimes going on automatic vacation isn't always avoidable.

i prefer unfair to fair almost every time.

Of course its unfair but while I am paying £5 a month for this privilege I think its very cool

Let me know when premium members get their minor pieces replaced with extra queens, then I will pony up.

My point is that any feature which effectively automatically ignores the time control is illogical (regardless of the class of player or game).

maybe illogical isn't the word.  but i get that you don't like it.  

If I'm going to pay extra I don't just want protection, they gotta give me something real.

But it doesn't ignore the time control. I have young children and at times have been unable to get online in the specified time so my games went on vacation. It was only for a matter of a day or 2 but for me it was necessary. The feature itself isn't designed to help players (ANY players) ignore their games. It is a feature which helps prevent unnecessary time forfeits.

If non premium members want to safe guard against time forfeits "just in case" then it is a very handy feature and could be worth subscribing. If players don't want to face the possibility of vacation abuse (and no I am not saying it doesn't happen cuz it does) then they have the option to avoid it by playing in no vacation tourneys.

http://www.chess.com/membership.html?c=navbar

I am pretty sure thats not the only benefits you get ...

what donna is saying is: kids ruin everything.

I understand its benefits, and that players find it useful.  But to me it is a contradiction to make it automatic.  It's a policy which undermines the rules.

But now I'm thinking that's probably too rigid a view point... because I can guess that it doesn't really hurt the game play for the majority of games.

And actually, if you're going to have the feature at all, it only makes sense if you give it to some players and not others, and in this case it makes the most sense to give this to paying members only.

So to answer the OP, any other arrangement wouldn't be as reasonable as what they're doing now.

to you.  it makes sense to at least one person -- erik.  and obviously several others.

Right and logging into a chess site to put yourself on vacation is a bigger priority obviously than dealing with an emergency? What about those that CAN'T log in to put themselves on vacation? Is that just a case of tough shit then?

I see you, my friend, HAVE a premium account so if you are so against using it then don't use it just don't criticize others if it becomes a necessity

exactly! Everyone here that is worried about an "unfair feature" should put it into perspective that the game isn't going anywhere and will start up again just where it left off. Play in no vacation tournament if it bothers you that much. What happens if someone gets arrested or put into a hospital? should they lose all those games and have their stats affected? Other people need this feature to fit into their busy lifestyles. I'd pay the money for the multiple other advantages of premium membership, but this is a nice safety net feature. Pay up or deal with it.

I am soooo glad someone saw my point here

What if you don't play tournaments, and your games come from open seeks?

You could also avoid paying members.

the DH is a dumb rule

not if you are an improved real fish.