Conditional Move Idea...

Exactly because this is a public forum, readers will see:

''

[me] »4. "Your fourth mistake is that nobody forces you to make use of conditional moves yourself." - Yet another claim which I never made. Straw man argument. Your 4rth error.«

[you] I give you that, you never claimed this in your posts. I just inferred it from your vocal opposition against conditional moves. I take that back.

''

I am willing to agree to the following two things only:

1. that you refused to apologize for twisting other people's words, and

2. that you lost this argument.

If I have a forcing variation and I play it as soon as I see their move (which could be in minutes), then it's functionally similar to conditionals. The only guarantees in Daily chess is that you'll get your X amount of days for a move and that is it (barring vacation). So, conditionals do not bypass that X amount of days.

I'm perfectly fine with someone making conditional moves and expect there is a chance that I won't get very much time on their turn but will use it if I get it; that's is why I'll use all my available time to calculate lines, even if they have a forced line against me.

Conditional moves are what they are; if someone thinks they are aggressive, there's not much anyone can do about that. It's a feature of Daily chess to be used as each player sees fit. Some people may even use them in the opening as well.

I realise that at the first glance a series of conditional moves can feel intimidating. One of my friends asked me "Am I so predictable?" when he was first confronted with that function.  I told him I had programmed other replies to the other logical moves he might have done. 

Another player who was quite new to chess.com asked me straight away how I did this and he wanted to do it himself.

Both of them are only playing on the phone and were very sad when I told them it's only available on the desktop version.

I have no idea what's so complicated to make this happen for the phone app as well, but I think it would only be fair to have this function for everyone.

Well, this is already getting repetitive, because you keep mentioning trivial facts about the feature; none of which I dispute as it would be pointless. My point has already been made. In fact you eloquently expressed it yourself and you just stopped short of admitting the difference it makes in the context of sportsmanship.

In fact sometimes I play fast myself; occasionally instantly even. The difference then is that I am actually "there", putting the effort, rather than relying on the server to artificially put pressure on my opponent.

It doesn't make a bit of difference to sportsmanship; conditional moves have nothing to do with it.

The only real argument, in that vein, is that mobile apps don't have the feature and basic members have a limited number of lines they can input, but the use of the feature itself isn't bad sportsmanship.

Being unaware of a feature or uncomfortable about a feature, doesn't make it poor sportsmanship.

Well, that is just your opinion. Which is not surprising at all given that you use the feature.

@TaxTheRich first of all, nice name, @Rich would love to meet you 😂

Secondly, sportsmanship is not something guaranteed for either player, if you want to argue conditional moves are unsporting go ahead.

However, that gives you no right to deprive someone else use of a feature unless it satisfies your conditions.

Why are you arguing here? I don't see any end goal for you.

Berate my post, avatar, speech, whatever all you want. Doesn't change a thing, my argument is irrefutable unless you wish to outlaw conditional moves for a majority of daily chess on this site, as well as on lichess, chesstempo, icc, and by-letter correspondence chess.

Good day and hope you find something more worthy of your time, no one here has been convinced. Thank you for presenting your novel viewpoint.

And the fact the site has had the feature for a long as I've been here and likely since the very early days of the daily chess being implemented. It's also a feature of correspondence chess in general, and likely available on most sites that offers the daily style play.

The listing trivial and completely generic facts does not constitute an argument in support of your opinion. Especially since -again- this discussion is not questioning their existence but their use.

1. I did not claim that sportsmanship is guaranteed. Straw-man argument.

2. I am not arguing about depriving anybody of anything. Straw-man argument

3. Whether you see a goal for me is irrelevant.

4. I am not interested in berating you nor your avatar; who cares anyway?

5. You claiming that your argument is irrefutable does not make your argument actually irrefutable. However, it is a... cute claim.

6. I do not pay any attention to advice regarding the use of my time from anonymous users of the internet.

7. Whether my argument has convinced anybody is not for you to decide.

This argument is hilarious… and it’s about saving time. This argument has lasted half a day so far 😂

And I can actually imagine TaxTheRich being the Lego man with the moustache talking… and laughing inside how he’s managing to troll people so easily 

The fact that correspondence has a built in mechanism for conditional moves, that many sites with daily formats have them, and they are explicitly allowed by the rules and not against the site's sportsmanship rules is a pretty good indicator that your opinion  apparently isn't widely shared. 

Except the discussion is not about the popularity of my idea. Moreover the popularity argument is another classic type of fallacy.

The fact that's it's a rule/feature for any site that has it implemented, makes it acceptable and not bad Sportsmanship to use. Appeal to feelings on the issue have no weight. If someone doesn't like the feature, they can play somewhere that doesn't have it.

You are once again repeating trivialities that have nothing to do with the discussion. Furthermore, your opinion on the weight of an argument is just that: your opinion. As is your advice on where people should play.

It's not just my opinion. Every site that has the feature agrees

Again, argumentum ad populum; a fallacy. If you have nothing new to add there is no need to keep repeating the same trivialities over and over again.

Seems like I'm not the only one repeating?

The simple facts have been laid out. But since you believe you're the only one that is right, you won't accept anything that doesn't agree with your viewpoint. So, have fun with that

You're the only one repeating trivial yet irrelevant facts over and over again after you conceded the point I made. 😄