Can't kick people out of tournaments?

One possible idea might be to make sort of a rating system for people as a TD. So, for example, I kick Erik out of one of my tournaments simply because Im afraid he might beat me, he can give me a negative "TD rating". Conversly, if someone else thinks I did a good job, and handled any situations that came up fairly, they could give me a positive "TD rating". The rating would have little real meaning only to show if a TD might be the type to boot people too quickly/unfairly. In order to curb abuse, limit the system so that a player can give exactly one rating point for every tournament they play in, that way, if I boot one player, he/she won't give me several bad ratings points simply because they are mad at me. Just a thought.

Sounds good.

 

Here's another idea, too: make the feature available to people who have more than X member points.

 

The theory of member points seems to be that it indicates community commitment by way of community involvement. Maybe it should be put to use. 

 

I agree satisfice, there needs to be someone in charge of tournaments. This should not be a difficult issue. You got someone in charge of this country, a work environment, a school, whatever. Without someone in charge there is chaos and unorganization. I think there should be a time limit on tournament GAMES, 2 or 3 weeks, as well as the current time limit on MOVES. If you don't have the time for a tournament, then you shouldn't be in it!! People who take too much time should have the right to a warning by the tournament director. If they don't comply, then they're out of the tournament. Simple as that!! If you think you were kicked out of a tournament for no reason, don't join a tournament by that person anymore!! This isn't rocket science!! I'm in a tournament right now that's been going on for like 2 months, and we are still in the FIRST round waiting for ONE GAME................................................still waiting.................

satisfice:

i think this is an important debate. we have tried to give all of the necessary tools to allow TDs to start their own events with whatever rules they want (we are about to work on the ability for TDs to allow vacation usage or not).  plus, you can remove players before the event starts.

my question is this: what are the scenarios in which somebody you allowed to enter the tournament should be ejected from the tournament? i understand the theory of freeing based on philosophical arguments of your control, etc, but it is a lot messier than that as there would be massive impact on so many parts of stats, etc. this is not at all a simple fix. so if you had use cases that were compelling, i would evaluate those. but my thought is that if you are allowed all of the freedom necessary at the beginning to set the rules and control who plays the event, i can't see a scenario where somebody should be ejected. :) 

To those of you that are worried about your ratings going down because you are wrongfully ejected from a tournament: If you were good enough to have that "rating" then you should have no problem bringing it back up, right? Just to clear things up, I think a tournament director should only be able to eject people because of time issues and thats it. Not because they don't like someone or because of name calling. What is too much time?? Whatever the tournament director says it is. All rules need to be established before the start of the tournament, of course.

I am currently involved in a tournament where one individual timed out in all the games where he was playing black because he never made a move, unfortunately all the games where he is playing white still give him 3 days to move despite the fact that he hasn't moved and we are almost 3 weeks into the tournament. something needs to be done to rectify that and similar situations.

In regards to ejecting someone who doesn't qualify for a particular tournament, the organizer should be able to do this without affecting ratings, games etc. but, only if the tournament has not begun.  Once the tourney begins then anyone who started should be allowed to finish.

Hi Erik,

 

Thanks for thinking about this. I appreciate your response.

 

I don't see how any game stats are affected. Could you say more about that? If leaving a tournament were not to cancel any games...? They would simply no longer be tournament games. I suppose it could affect tournament stats, but aren't those just curiosities?

 

Right now I have a derelict game in my inbox that I can't resign from, without losing tournament points vs. other players, yet the player has disappeared. If it were not a tournament game, I could resign and that would be that. In fact, it's not clear to me how my tournament can ever end, since there is no timeout on first moves and the guy won't move!

 

Tossing people before the tournament starts does nothing to solve problems that arise during the tournament. 

 

My biggest concern is that it seems oddly paternal to say that a TD must justify ejecting people from his own party. Have you encountered another website with such a policy? None come to my mind. Just because I elect to use the apparatus of tournaments on this site, why should we be asked to give up our privilege of free association that we otherwise have, here, in abundance?

 

Or if it bothers you that much, you can implement it as a feature called "fun tournaments." If I mark the FUN check box, then the tournament doesn't count toward the tournament-level statistics (I don't know how those tournament-level statistics are in any way meaningful, but whatever) and the TD is free to control membership throughout the process based on any old whim. 

 

I'm glad you're thinking about this. Because the level of annoyance I feel over this is just high enough to sour me on the idea of tournaments altogether. I didn't realize, and don't accept, that hosting a tournament should be an open invitation to harassment by derelict players. 

 

Hi alabaster,

 

Tournaments devoted to openings are controlled automatically. You choose from a menu of openings and the games start out in the correct position.

 

Someday, I hope they will allow us to upload a position FEN and start a tournament from that place.

 

 

No way the tournament directors should have blank check to kick out whomever they like!

It's not "their" tournament. The tournament belongs to the players. The responsibility of the TM is to run the tournament. Nothing more, nothing less.

The point is that someone needs to take control of the tournaments because there are players who take advantage of the time and ruin it for everyone else.

I am absolutely opposed to the idea posted above that the tournament is "the TM's party". The way I see it, once the TM has started the tournament, they should be in the background. Unless there's a problem I don't want to hear from them at all.

The issue of timeouts should be handled at the chess.com level - it should not be up to the TM. Kicking someone out of the tournament for an arbitrary reason is simply ridiculous. Also, having an eBay-style feedback system for TMs would not work well. There should be a system in place which allows all new members to make new tournaments, and for those tournaments to be trusted. This would not be the case if TMs had to earn their "TM" star, or something like that.

Erik, I agree with you that there aren't many reasons to kick out someone from a tournament. If the tournament requires people to have all attended a certain chess club, or whatever, then the tournament director should verify these before the tournament starts. But to go back to the start of the thread, it should not be possible to "derail" a tournament simply because a user doesn't log in for an extended period of time.

One last note. If a tournament is started, and there is a _very_ slow player (one who takes the full time per move), then this is an exact example of someone who may be kicked out by a micromanaging TM - and exactly the sort of TM abuse which should not be allowed by giving them such a blank check.

Another last note. :-). The way that FICS does it is to have a designated list of tournament organizers. Presumably the staff evaluated this and decided it was not a good idea. But at least it does a good job in having a uniformity of tournament experience for the typical tournament entrant.

Ozzie

i tend to agree... there really hasn't been a case made for the "need" for additional power to deal with a situation that the current rules don't already handle.  ie... someone takes too long to make a move... their time elapses, they lose.  Where's the harassment?  If the game has a certain time allowance, you have that much time to make a move.  Be it 1 day, 3 days, or 14 days... any time within that allowance is fair game.  If you violate that, you lose.  If you boot someone who hasn't "broken" a rule... then you're abusing your discretion(not having played any player run tournaments, nor being an expert on the workings of this website... those are just my observations of the rules and situation). That being said... a player who's clearly not participating for multiple games probably should be naturally eliminated, but again... it doesn't mean the TM needs a "boot" button.  A simple check box for "time lose X number of games drop player from tournament" type setting at Tourney creation would eliminate the issue all together.  Chess, is a game... people tend to forget that when aspects of competition are added to it.  If you're not having fun you shouldn't play.  If a game, a tournament, or something is truly affecting you... take a step back, take a deep breath and relax... in all likelihood you've got days till you need to make a move, gives you ample time to pull yourself together and remember, at it's heart it's just a game. The aspect of this thread that I think is the most disturbing is the random hostility and absurd thirst for power oozing from the OP.  I don't think I'd want to be in a tournament run by that guy... certainly wouldn't want someone like that to be able to arbitrarily decide which rules about how the games work count...depending on how he/she personally feels about my games.  Like it or not you're in a public environment, subject to the annoyances and tribulations of morons and elitists each propped up on their own inflated self delusions.  Whether you pay to be here or not, you're no better than anyone else, and the enjoyment of the "one" should never realistically outstrip the enjoyment for the "many".  (w00t...spellcheck!)

Hi Ozzie,

 

I don't see how your feelings are consistent with common practice on social networking websites. When I organize a tournament, I am not thinking of myself as a volunteer for chess.com, or a representative of FICS.

 

The tournament belongs to the players on a game by game level and that is in no way threatened by my proposal. But when I participate in a tournament I need to know that the other players are respecting the rules (as well as good sportsmanship) and the tournament director needs the tools to do that job.

 

But if this is important to you, why not establish two kinds of tournaments? One could be called a "fun" tournament, or a "party" tournament, where we choose to trust the organizer.

 

 

Maybe a customizable limit based on how many days you are inactive, or how many losses-on-time a player has in a certain tournament?

Would it be better to have a vote to boot someone from a tournament?  That seems like a compromise that would limit TD abuse, but also provide a way to remove a totally inactive (or otherwise rule-infringing) player.

TD abuse is a problem that is easily managed: don't sign up for tournaments run by people you believe are abusive; withdraw from tournaments run by people you consider abusive (withdrawing from a tournament should not automatically cancel your games in progress).

 

From what I've seen so far, player abuse is a far greater problem than director abuse. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how my tournament is supposed to end-- ever-- if a player refuses to move... 

 

We don't need a bureacracy to run private, fun, tournaments among consenting adults. We don't need chess.com telling us what we can and can't do on a tournament level.

 

The considerations that matter are the integrity of each game and the integrity of the player rating system. These are not at issue, here.

 

I don't know how to say it any clearer, so I'll stop now. The fact is, even without a tournament system that works, I still like playing games on this site.

 

i hear you, but what you are asking for is NOT easy. it isn't simple enough to just say "this is no longer a tounrament game". tournament and regular games are the same except linked by a tournament ID. you can't force a loss in the tournament and allow a win in the regular game. so that is why i am asking you to provide, aside from the paternalistic feeling, a use case of where you should be able to kick somebody out of an event. :)

that would help a ton! otherwise we'll just keep adding on rules to tournament creation, but not allow TDs to kick players in-game. 

Again, having a "boot" button for power hungry TDs is ridiculous. Satis: When I join a tournament, I do not expect to have to evaluate the TD. If you want this feature, then call it something else, not a tournament. Call it a party for all I care. Then you can invite whomever you want, and kick out whomever you want. Just don't call it a tournament. Also, what you term "social networking common practice" just does not hold water. You go to any chess tournament, and TDs most definitely do NOT kick people out for using the maximum amount of time.

Why don't you just make your tournament invite-only?

Erik: I can't stress enough that you will not be happy with the results if you give a boot button to the TD masses. It wouldn't even work if the TD group were vetted and closely monitored.

Hi Erik,

 

The use cases are truly irrelevant. It's like taking a use case approach to justifying the First Amendment. The First Amendment to the Constitution applies and the use cases attacking it are exceptions. Not the other way around.

 

Example use case: I boot someone because I feel like it. This is a sufficient reason on a site like this. We are under no bylaws or contract to continue a tournament against our will. These tournament don't count toward any system of rating people that's more than just simple fun. And if you think they are, I humble suggest a lot of us would like to have a tournament mode that IS just fun, so that we don't have to ask the website Daddy for permission to regulate ourselves according to whatever silly values we happen to have.

 

I think voluntary association (including the ability of people to hold gatherings and police those gathering according to their own whims) is a fundamental principle of online social networking culture. You may not share that view, and it's your site so you get to dictate how it goes.  I'm just speaking as one of your customers about a feature that I wish this site had, so that I could enjoy holding a tournament-- instead of dreading it and feeling helpless.

i hear you. and i totally understand where you are coming from. but the fact is i have to deal with more than you :) i have to deal with the customer service issues (why was i booted??? that's not fair!!!) and the massive massive coding issues involved in doing this (instead of doing something like Live Chess, or opening explorer).

so while i may agree with you in principle, i can't in practice. sometimes the rights of the many trump those of the few. i'm very sorry and i hope this won't upset you too much. :(