Forums

Site changes, new policies

Sort:
Avatar of TheOldReb
NM TheOldReb
Jun 9, 2010
0
#41

Its actually pretty funny that one complains of adjudications here and then mentions ICC, as if they dont have them there. I have been a member of ICC since 1996 and they have always had adjudications there..... they even adjudicate blitz/bullet games !  <GASP> 

Avatar of CarlMI
CarlMI
Jun 9, 2010
0
#42

Trite as it sounds, to me, it is the principle involved, and this really has nothing to do with adjudication.  ICCF and ICC have adjudications and the rules are clear.  Time for the tournament has elapsed (around 2 years in correspondence, 20 minutes a round in blitz, etc.) or a game has been abandoned.  Also at ICC I just play blitz, noescape, vacation and abandonment are never issues.  I admit I should not have cited ICC as it is irrelevant to the present discussion. 

My point is the vagueness of the policy here and the walkarounds I've been hearing, most admittedly by members rather than staff.  On the other hand, the staff does seem to respond to the vocal members thus the original implementation of the policy.  Vacation belongs to the player to use as they wish. As the FAQ says, its for when I need a break (see earlier thread). If my opponent wants to play with move allowances and vacation time hoping I'll drop dead while one move from mate, so be it.  The vacation is the player's whether as part of his free membership or if he paid for it.  What's next, "My opponent uses all 3 days for his move when I'm winning"?  The horror!

If, as Erik says, the policy has very rarely been invoked, why was it even necessary?  To invoke the policy, two adjudications have been made, vacation was abused, and the game is lost.  My point is, vacation can't be abused and a game is not lost if you lack material to win, or your opponent has overwhelming material or whatever.  Opponents make mistakes, nonwinnable games can be drawn, etc. 

If the length of vacations is a problem, reduce vacation time across the board (for a site solution), play no vacation tournament/games (for individual solution). As a final thought, how do you know the vacation is not being used for legitimate reasons?  If I say I am on vacation.  I have valid reasons.  How can that be challenged? 

BTW, the current vacation is the first I've taken in a couple years, I started it with 2 months, 29 days on the books, and although I've had games drag and many a win on time I've never called for an adjudicaiton. 

Avatar of artfizz
artfizz
Jun 9, 2010
0
#43
CarlMI wrote:

... My point is the vagueness of the policy here and the walkarounds I've been hearing, most admittedly by members rather than staff.  ...

If, as Erik says, the policy has very rarely been invoked, why was it even necessary?  ...

 

You may not like chess.com’s Terms & Conditions, which contain many contingencies e.g. 

  1. You may not post any offensive content …
  2. You may not add any offensive comments, …
  3. Members may only have ONE Chess.com account. Members who create more than one account may have all accounts closed.
  4. ... certain Chess.com services may have their own associated privacy statements.
  5. Chess.com may combine information about you that we have with information we obtain ...
  6. Chess.com may set and access Chess.com ‘cookies’ on your computer.
  7. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information ...
  8. You may opt out of the use of the DART cookie ...
  9. These companies may use your personal information to help Chess.com ...
  10. Chess.com may update this policy.
  11. Chess.com may also offer other services ...
  12. You accept that the Service may include advertisements.
  13. ... you may register as a user of Chess.com ...
  14. You acknowledge, consent and agree that Chess.com may access, preserve and disclose ...
  15. You acknowledge that Chess.com may establish general practices and limits ...
  16. ... the maximum number of email messages that may be sent from or received ...
  17. ... the maximum size of any email message that may be sent from or received ...
  18. ... the maximum number of times (and the maximum duration for which) you may access the Service in a given period of time ...
  19. You agree that Chess.com may, under certain circumstances and without prior notice, immediately terminate your Chess.com account ...
  20. ... you may unintentionally be exposed to Content ...
  21. You acknowledge that Chess.com may or may not pre-screen Content ...
  22. ... you acknowledge that you may not rely on any Content ...
  23. You understand that the Service and software embodied within the Service may include security components ...
  24. You may not attempt to override or circumvent any of the usage rules embedded into the Service ...
  25. The Service may provide, or third parties may provide, links ...
  26. You also may be subject to additional terms and conditions that may apply when you use or purchase certain other ...
  27. ... THE RESULTS THAT MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE USE OF THE SERVICE WILL BE ACCURATE OR RELIABLE;
  28. A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF USERS MAY EXPERIENCE EPILEPTIC SEIZURES WHEN EXPOSED TO CERTAIN LIGHT PATTERNS OR BACKGROUNDS ON A COMPUTER SCREEN OR WHILE USING THE SERVICE. CERTAIN CONDITIONS MAY INDUCE PREVIOUSLY UNDETECTED EPILEPTIC SYMPTOMS EVEN IN USERS WHO HAVE NO HISTORY OF PRIOR SEIZURES OR EPILEPSY.
  29. SOME OF THE ABOVE LIMITATIONS MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.
Avatar of TheOldReb
NM TheOldReb
Jun 9, 2010
0
#44
AnthonyCG wrote:

The problem is people abusing it when they have only a king vs. the Spanish Armada - it's a bit one-sided... The reason we have vacation threads is to complain about abusers: people using vacation in lost games and continuing to play games where they actually have chances. Of course we can pretend that we don't really know whats going on and plead the fifth but it's quite obvious when a user uses vacation to prolong ONLY losing games that they are being very unsportsmanlike. And pretending that this doesn't happen is simply denial on your part and in fact it's very annoying.

You could have simply stated that since staff can't prove with a preponderance of the evidence that certain people are always abusing vacation that nothing can be really done. Instead you are playing a sort of devils advocate and are trying way to hard to do it. 

A 2300 rated cc player should obviously know what lost positions are which makes it even more obvious that you really seem to be in denial here... But that's not important since nothing can be done without punishing the wrong people. I'm sure that's the point you wanted to make but you could've done it a lot simpler than this.

 I didnt know one could still do this ?  I thought if you are on vacation in one game you are on vacation in ALL games ?  Is this not the case ?

Avatar of artfizz
artfizz
Jun 9, 2010
0
#45
AnthonyCG wrote:

... people using vacation in lost games and continuing to play games where they actually have chances. ...

Reb wrote: I didnt know one could still do this ?  I thought if you are on vacation in one game you are on vacation in ALL games ?  Is this not the case ?

Explained in this thread ... vacation-protection-unfair. 

1. No-vacation tournaments.

2. Auto-timeout protection cutting in for premium members.

Avatar of TheOldReb
NM TheOldReb
Jun 9, 2010
0
#46

Thanks artfizz

Avatar of Phobetrix
Phobetrix
Jun 9, 2010
0
#47

I am sorry for being slow, but I had learned that one could put on the vacation "flag" ONLY after having made one's move in ALL games. On this basis one cannot choose to vacate certain games only, which I think is the way it should be. Has this been changed?

Avatar of Phobetrix
Phobetrix
Jun 9, 2010
0
#48
ilikeflags wrote:

lynch mob eh?  strange metaphor in this case.

Sorry, but that did not help me or my query - can someone enlighten me?

Avatar of artfizz
artfizz
Jun 9, 2010
0
#49
Phobetrix wrote:

I am sorry for being slow, but I had learned that one could put on the vacation "flag" ONLY after having made one's move in ALL games. On this basis one cannot choose to vacate certain games only, which I think is the way it should be. Has this been changed?

No change. As discussed in the thread ... vacation-protection-unfair, if you have joined any no-vacation tournaments, those games won't be put on vacation.

Secondly, if you are a premium member then you have auto-timeout protection; when the first game is about to timeout, vacation mode will be switched on. Status will show as vacation on that game - and probably all games where it is your move, but will remain as waiting on games where it is not your move.

As it becomes your move on any of these waiting games, the status will be changed to vacation.

Thus a member's game list can display all three statuses - waiting, your move & vacation - at the same time.

2. Auto-timeout protection cutting in for premium members.

Avatar of TheGrobe
TheGrobe
Jun 9, 2010
0
#50

That's the same as #2.

Avatar of Phobetrix
Phobetrix
Jun 9, 2010
0
#51
bsrasmus wrote:
artfizz wrote:
AnthonyCG wrote:

... people using vacation in lost games and continuing to play games where they actually have chances. ...

Reb wrote: I didnt know one could still do this ?  I thought if you are on vacation in one game you are on vacation in ALL games ?  Is this not the case ?

Explained in this thread ... vacation-protection-unfair. 

1. No-vacation tournaments.

2. Auto-timeout protection cutting in for premium members.

3.  If you are a paying member you can go on vacation while it's your move in some/all of your games.  So you can go back and forth on and off of vacation status without ever making moves in games in which you are losing.  Effectively you are only on vacation for the games you aren't losing.

Many thanks for the replies! I am a paying member and I have the impression that going on vacation MUST be preceded my me making a move in ALL my games. So there is obviously something I still don't understand, and if so, that "something" is clearly a bug in the system.

Avatar of TheGrobe
TheGrobe
Jun 9, 2010
0
#52
bsrasmus wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:

That's the same as #2.

Actually, it isn't.  Auto-protection kicks in when you are about to lose on time without your action.  I'm talking about a paying member changing the status themselves.

The only difference is the mechanism that turns the vacation time on (i.e. automated versus manual) -- the underlying issue is something that's common to both of them -- the fact that you're not required to make your moves prior to starting your vacation however you might initiate it.

Avatar of TheGrobe
TheGrobe
Jun 9, 2010
0
#53

Frivolous abuse reports are a drain on the resources that should be dealing with actual cases of abuse.

Why not just block him like you do everyone else who disagrees with you?

Avatar of Phobetrix
Phobetrix
Jun 9, 2010
0
#54
TheGrobe wrote:
bsrasmus wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:

That's the same as #2.

Actually, it isn't.  Auto-protection kicks in when you are about to lose on time without your action.  I'm talking about a paying member changing the status themselves.

The only difference is the mechanism that turns the vacation time on (i.e. automated versus manual) -- the underlying issue is something that's common to both of them -- the fact that you're not required to make your moves prior to starting your vacation however you might initiate it.

Very sorry TheGrobe, but I don't understand. I am ONLY talking about the vacation time I will turn on manually (when needed). In THAT case I've understood that you cannot do it unless you've made all the moves in the ongoing games - has this been changed?

Avatar of TheGrobe
TheGrobe
Jun 9, 2010
0
#55

Perhaps I'm mistaken -- I have so few games on the go that I've really not run across the restriction when I've turned my vacation on manually -- I was simply taking what bsrasmus said at face value.

Avatar of bigpoison
bigpoison
Jun 9, 2010
0
#56
TheGrobe wrote:

Frivolous abuse reports are a drain on the resources that should be dealing with actual cases of abuse.

Why not just block him like you do everyone else who disagrees with you?

How is it possilbe that he has not yet blocked 'flags.  'flags is an irrational fella, obviously, if he disagrees with the 'geek.

Avatar of TheGrobe
TheGrobe
Jun 9, 2010
0
#57

Well, for the record he didn't call you stupid, he said you said something stupid.  That's not a personal attack, it's his assessment of your statement and, as I see it, entirely fair game.

I'd expect that if a user gets multiple abuse reports from a variety of other users in the community then they will absolutely look into it further.  On the other hand, if chess.com gets multiple frivolous abuse reports that continuously come from the same user, I'd expect that they'd start to ignore that user's reports.  It's a shame, because someday you may actually see a wolf.

Avatar of trysts
trysts
Jun 9, 2010
0
#58

Mr. Garrison calls people stupid all the time. But how do you block Mr. Hat?

Avatar of TheOldReb
NM TheOldReb
Jun 9, 2010
0
#59

I think you oughta run tell your momma !!  Undecided

Avatar of Phobetrix
Phobetrix
Jun 9, 2010
0
#60
bsrasmus wrote:
Phobetrix wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:
bsrasmus wrote:
TheGrobe wrote:

That's the same as #2.

Actually, it isn't.  Auto-protection kicks in when you are about to lose on time without your action.  I'm talking about a paying member changing the status themselves.

The only difference is the mechanism that turns the vacation time on (i.e. automated versus manual) -- the underlying issue is something that's common to both of them -- the fact that you're not required to make your moves prior to starting your vacation however you might initiate it.

Very sorry TheGrobe, but I don't understand. I am ONLY talking about the vacation time I will turn on manually (when needed). In THAT case I've understood that you cannot do it unless you've made all the moves in the ongoing games - has this been changed?

Yes, you can do it without making a move in all of your games -- if you are a paying member.

That means there is a change in the rules & I don't believe this unless I get confirmation from someone who knows