Point has been grumbling on for quite a long time, partly no doubt because elite players never encounter it so they don't appreciate it or understand it. A look at match between team Scotland and team Bulgaria about 13 months ago should prove illuminating . I am not suggesting gamesmanship was involved, merely that Fair Play it was not.
Fair Play Policy
Sort:
Aug 13, 2011
0
#43
artfizz wrote:
dpruess wrote:
i couldn't answer it, because i did not understand what it meant. i still don't.
Presumably, with new members now tagged as Unrated until they have completed five rated games,
Where does it say this ?
Aug 13, 2011
0
#44
dpruess wrote: i couldn't answer it, because i did not understand what it meant. i still don't.
artfizz wrote: Presumably, with new members now tagged as Unrated until they have completed five rated games,
kohai wrote: Where does it say this ?
My mistake! It was a bug associated with a recent update. All players with more unrated games than rated games got marked as unrated until they finished another rated game.
(some-members-once-with-ratings-are-now-unrated)
what happened probably was he disconnected and after two minutes our system forfeited him for not reconnecting.
dpruess,
how's the fair play policy working out? do you have any general impressions or statistics?
i can't give you a good answer right now, sorry! i'll do an analysis later, but am swamped with other stuff at the moment.
Terricotta wrote:
look, you're making impossible and unfair requests here. If someone aborts, theres no way to tell what the reason was for, and there's nothing wrong with aborting because you want to play a different color.
Ah, you're wrong. Aborting because the color is "wrong" *is* bad sportsmanship in and of itself. It's annoying.
Along with that, there are people who wait for white to make the first move, then abort if they don't like that move. Possibly, they're random disconnects, that's quite unlikely. If you're too finicky to play black, or don't like the first move, then don't play.
dpruess wrote:
we do have ways, but you can report them too, by clicking on the help&support link at the bottom of every page.
Oh, I didn't know that. Good to know.
Hi, as of the last week every match that i search for i get a message stating : Your account may be restricted etc...
Any ideas as to why and how i can stop this?
Dec 7, 2011
0
#51
harlemwinter wrote:
Hi, as of the last week every match that i search for i get a message stating : Your account may be restricted etc...
Any ideas as to why and how i can stop this?
Can you take a look at this page please, it explains in detail.
You should be allowed to abort any game without penalty if your opponent's internet connection is "Yellow" or "Red". This is especially valid in blitz games.
TheGodfather000 wrote:
I have a better idea for the "Fair Play Policy", not only ban those who abort game but also ban those who deny a challenge...
Huh .. Nobody asked to be challenged .... How can we be forced to accept Every Challenge we get ? .. I think it's people's right whether they wanna accept a Challenge or not.
I"m not sure computers should be protected by the fair play policy. However, I am aware that some members here would like to play with the comp. Sometimes people wait for a particular computer challenge to become available and it's not fair if someone stalls or disconnects with the computer while these people wait for a computer challenge. But before the policy was implemented, i accepted a computer challenge, then aborted so i could challenge it to an unrated game. I play against the comp to experiment with things, and would really like it if the outcome of my game with a comp was not subject to the fair play policy.
kohai wrote:
harlemwinter wrote:
Hi, as of the last week every match that i search for i get a message stating : Your account may be restricted etc...
Any ideas as to why and how i can stop this?
Can you take a look at this page please, it explains in detail.
Thank you for the reply, but I had already read that page prior to posting. But i believe that the message I am seeing is a standard message as I am not doing anything wrong and nothing has happened to my account. If this is so, please forgive my ignorance.
TheGodfather000 wrote:
@ Kikyo_Sushi, and how can we be forced to accept any random player the auto-system match with us? Its people's right to choose their opponent, too.
.. that's why we r given ( n' encouraged to use ) the options to set our preferred Rating Limits and Time Controls/Game Type for our Opponents .. the System is only helping to 'match' us up' to make it easier n' faster for us [ which is very Kind n' Helpful ! 
]
.. it's not random anymore n' it's our Choice actually as compared with people's ( mostly friend's) Challenges where they set their own preferences .
Dec 8, 2011
0
#57
kco wrote:
question here: Is there any way we can tell if the player are breaching the 'Fair play policy' by having a flag next to thier name and has there been any players hit with this rule yet ?
I had an opponent disconnect in the middle of the game. A message then popped up saying he was being flagged (investigated?) for Fair Play violations.
Terricotta wrote:
look, you're making impossible and unfair requests here. If someone aborts, theres no way to tell what the reason was for, and there's nothing wrong with aborting
Yes I agree. And what if the phone rigns and it's work? or someone is at the door? That can certainly lead to a delay in responding - and of course, what about there is thinking time.
And chess.com's java scripts DO cause browsers to crash or freeze., not to mention it is very easy to accidentally close a browser window.
As for people that alledgedly abort to change color - um, duh, all you have to do is make aborted games NOT affect the color choosing algorythym.
As for delays - sometimes you cannot hear the BEEP sound when you are working in another window/workspace on the computer and not realize that it is time to move. Chess.com would actually be advised to create a Java App that could take focus when it was a player's move.
As long as it is a webpage though, these "fair play" ideas are somewhat "odd".
Well, I've had a quite annoying problem today.
I played some 3 or 4 matches with other people, twice THEY (and with they I mean the other player and not me) lost for abandoning the game (not resigning but letting me there waiting for the time to go on) and now I have to wait 5 minutes between a match and another because I have been not fair.
This would not be logical even in Wonderland.
i couldn't answer it, because i did not understand what it meant. i still don't.
Presumably, with new members now tagged as Unrated until they have completed five rated games, there is much less of a problem with 1200-rated players masquerading as novices?