Is Auto-vacation for paid users unfair?

you by defintion know the time control since you know any paid member will get vacation time automatically. IMO CC chess is about learning anyway only time I dont like winning on time in an equal position or only having a slight edge. 

Again i think a maximum vacation time would be nice and helpful for management.

6 days in hospital? screw you!

that doesn't sound like a vacation.

OK I'm obviously just stating an extreme hypothetical case about the jail time or the hospital stay, pick at it how you will. Seriously though, chess.com is free to all. Thats like someone giving you a free peanut butter and jelly sandwich, and then you complain because some guy just paid for a turkey and swiss sandwich. If you think its unfair that people who pay money in support of this site should not be given some protection against timing out then you're just being a drama queen. Like I said, a site needs money to run, so pay up or deal with it.

hey, i like flags too, that's cool

vex-ed by ilology

You are so talking out of your ass. If my son goes into hospital due to an accident the VERY last thing on my mind is going to be logging in to go on vacation you dumbass. Anyone that has a 0.000025 gram brain would see that

did you mean to say illogy? there's only three words in your statement, I guess my actions are full of illogy for responding to someone that spelled only the word "by" correctly in a three word sentence fragment.

irrelevent. Its the rules,... vacation days when games can take months to complete is fair. the benefit of having it automatically engaged is just a small issue. Whining about it really wont change things and its not a game changing rule. If you think someone abuses it too often resign the game if you think its not important..

So wait... how exactly is vacation time unfair? Or are people just annoyed that premium members seemingly can't lose on time? Do people not know there is only a limited amount of vacation days per premium account?

I honestly believe the only people who complain about vacation are the epitome of impatience. Which honeslty makes no sense given the format.

Really. I just want a clear-cut explanation as to why vacation time is unfair. I'm dying to hear it.  

Hi all just jumping in here, I'm a paid user and I didn't even know about this auto-vacation function until a derecho hit and knocked power and internet out for almost two weeks.  I had something like 30+ games going at the time, and roughly half were "no vacation" tournament games which, I timed out on of course, but I'm glad I didn't lose them all. I'll have to wait something like 90 days (right?) for my timeout ratio to be cleared (was 0% before this and I had never used vacation time before) in order to be able to enter most of the new tournaments that I get invited to.  Doesn't seem so unfair to me. Honestly, I play enough games that even if someone wanted to go on vacation for 6 months I probably wouldn't even notice. LOL!

If anyone thinks auto vacation is unfair, simply host and/or only play no vacation games.

I can't see that it makes any difference whether I activate my vacation or I let the auto-vacation feature activate it.  Either way, I have the time remaining on my clock plus my remaining vacation time to make my move.

illology would have worked "better" i suppose but illogy -- no. ilology is fine by me.

Auto timeout protection is the only reason I pony up the dough--and the unlimited tactics trainer.

The dh is a stupid rule.

I try to not use auto vacation, but there were situations where I couldn't get online soon enough and was glad the feature prevented me from timing out. In return I have "autoclaim win on time out" turned off so nobody will lose on time against me either. 

bigpoison helped to show why this is the case. If a feature is more likely to make someone sub up, then it is a smart feature. At the end of the day they have to make money.

If a person continually uses the auto vacation feature s/he will eventually use up all of their vacation time and have no benefit anyway.

In a site where such a large portion of the users don't ever pay a cent, I don't think it is worth complaining that someone who does pay gets something you don't. You get a lot for free, and the person still has x number of vacation days total. Your game ends up no different then if the person had taken the time to click vacation.

It's unfair? Not so sure. I'm a non-payer and I accept that if I were to become a paying member, there might have to be some inducements. But I'm quite capable of playing a move every three days or setting the vacation meter. The only problem would be leaving it too late and then finding the internet down or the computer broken.

Peasants:  we are subsidising your free ride, of course we deserve perks.  To be a little more serious, there are other factors - if people who are not interested in playing on the site long-term get autovacation it will impact on those of us who are when they decide "My rating has dropped 100 points, I am not bothering with this one any more."  It is really a very small feature to complain about though - it has minimal impact.  You may as well complain about not being able to join 2 tournaments at once or having to face advertisements or so on.  It doesnt cost much to ante up a little for the basic premium membership.  I only did it to play in a second tournament and it was worth it easily.  Plus, dont tell Ivandh but yes we are allowed a free queen if we pay an extra $5.

A player does not generate vacation time-as a premium member- itas part of the chess.com program

"think" is the key word.