FirebrandX wrote:
Now if only we can get the clocks started on the first move instead of the 2nd...
why would that matter to anyone ?
A List of the Stupid Things About Chess.com Live
Sort:
Jul 23, 2010
0
#23
apparently, what you view as a problem, others resolve quickly (without a second thought) by aborting the game if the opponent doesn't move within a reasonable time (5-15 seconds) as I do.
You may sit silently, stewing for five minutes if you wish. that is a personal choice.
regards,
pretty cool flame war guys (:
A few things here:
I haven't started college yet. I'm enjoying my summer for now. When school starts, I won't be playing chess nearly as much.
My mom works on commision and has put in an excessive amount of hours to ensure I'll have enough money for school. I wouldn't dare ask her for money for a game website. Even if I did donate, I'd do it to support the site, not for the extras that I wouldn't use. And I do plan to donate to this and many other game sites I want to see grow in the future (when I earn my own money).
There would be no reason to get rid of the disable chat button. It's already programmed anyway. It doesn't bother me. I just feel like it's encouraging paranoia that isn't necessary. In truth, the majority of what I have encountered in the chatbox is pure trash talk. It's actually pretty surprising how many people start insulting me for no reason after I win.
I said how people have tried joining over and over to ninja queens, but that isn't the main reason why I want it changed. What bugs me is people premoving their 2-3 moves then resigning after I take the pawn or bishop they left hanging. If they want to premove the beginning of the game, more power to them. I believe they should have to face the consequences of any blunders they set themself up for in doing so.
And I don't know what you mean by "colors are evened out over time", Mr. Mod. I think I can recall confirming that you can infinitely play as white.
Btw, I'll never mention any of this again if you bring fischer random to live.
roffle, i'm also waiting for fischer random to be added to live!! it's up there on my list, though not at the very top. we need additional features like adding time, takebacks, multiple chat channels, etc... first.
yes, if someone wanted to only play as white, and never accepted open seeks, only send personal challenges they could play white indefinitely. has anyone ever done that? for you as a player over time, your white black should come out to very close to 50-50, unless a significant percentage of our population is going to that length to play white all the time.
I've already made some comments about "live chess" here but I thought it would be better suited here, maybe.
The problem for me has been the auto-losing when you happen to sign out or switch over to postal chess for five minutes. I think that's not right at all. I've now halted playing "live chess" since it's been such a nuisance and irritation.
DMJ
Aug 2, 2010
0
#27
No one has the right to bully or harrass anyone for not subscribing to the site, it's a personal decision and doesn't even need to be explained to third parties.
Err...what's fischer random? 
kingrider wrote:
may b u r right!! anothr thing is in live chess ,imagine we r playing an about to win game and if there is a powercut or net disconnection,chess.com concludes us as losers no mattr how much lead we r in ......Ive lost nearly half a dozen games coz of poor net connection !!!!
I used to be annoyed about that too...but it wasn't long before i found a solution-get better internet! lol
Aug 2, 2010
0
#30
KingOfCheckmate wrote:
Err...what's fischer random?
just another word for 960 chess
kco wrote:
KingOfCheckmate wrote:
Err...what's fischer random?
just another word for 960 chess
ok thanks
polydiatonic wrote:
Godspawn wrote:
polydiatonic wrote:
RoffleMyWafflez wrote:
I play TONS of live speed chess on this site. Although I can't afford to be a member,
First let me say that I agree with some of what you said, but I'm sorry I've got to call BS
On this this "can't afford" stuff. You can buy a membership for as little as $2.49/month. If you can't afford that, how can you afford a computer, or the electricity to use it. Or for that matter what the hell are you doing killing time on a chess website. Go get some sort of job where you can EARN 10 CENTS/DAY so that you can afford a membership.
Okay, so I've sounded off. I don't really care if you're a premimum member or not, but this idea that there's anyone (not living in a third world country) who can't AFFORD IT IS JUST KIND OF DOPEY.
To you $2.49 a month may not sound like a lot but it is to those that cant afford it. Please dont assume someone doesnt have a job or needs to get a a better job simply because they cant afford a membership here. There are many reason's a membership cannot be afforded, and to just say "I call BS..." is just ignorant. You dont know the reasons behind the statement.
Well, actually we now DO know the reasons why he can't "afford" it. The guy's going to an "expensive" college and he doesn't want to trouble his mom for $2.49/month. That's just weak. I don't care if he's a paid member or not. I'm just saying that unless there's a real reason, like physical disability or mental handicap there's no good reason I can think of for not being able to scrape together a couple of bucks A MONTH, unless, AS HE SAYS, you just don't really want to do it. I feel completely vindicated in my opinion.
Btw the fact that he's not a paying member has ZERO relevence to the actual point of the thread and maybe after he's been in college for a while he'll figure out how to leave pointless information out of his "thesis statement".
Maybe his 'can't afford' statement is not about monetary concerns. He could just see it as a waste of money and therefore, he would even want to spend a penny on it. thus, he "can't afford" it...
DAchessmaster99, you must have missed my above post. (or chose to ignore it so we can argue over what finacial or moral position allows someone to say they can't afford something)
"My mom works on commision and has put in an excessive amount of hours to ensure I'll have enough money for school. I wouldn't dare ask her for money for a game website. Even if I did donate, I'd do it to support the site, not for the extras that I wouldn't use. And I do plan to donate to this and many other game sites I want to see grow in the future (when I earn my own money)."
IF discussing other members values has any value, I think the bigger issue is this:
A Non-paying member wants something for free.
Well, big surprise there. Everybody wants software/code for free. As a software developer myself, it pains me every time I hear someone wishing their software was free. Perhaps that's why I can't make a living making educational games anymore. People don't want good code - they want Free free free!
Well guess what!... Sometimes you get what you paid for!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining that you're not a paid member, but to be asking for favors ahead of the needs of those who "pay the bills", perhaps that's the deeper social issue here - not the "10 cents a month" issue.
But hey! It's a "free" country, right? <sigh>
PeterThePawn wrote:
IF discussing other members values has any value, I think the bigger issue is this:
A Non-paying member wants something for free.
Well, big surprise there. Everybody wants software/code for free. As a software developer myself, it pains me every time I hear someone wishing their software was free. Perhaps that's why I can't make a living making educational games anymore. People don't want good code - they want Free free free!
Well guess what!... Sometimes you get what you paid for!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining that you're not a paid member, but to be asking for favors ahead of the needs of those who "pay the bills", perhaps that's the deeper social issue here - not the "10 cents a month" issue.
But hey! It's a "free" country, right?
Woah, I don't where this came from. I'm giving suggestions to improve the site. The nicer the site is, the more money chess.com makes. It doesn't matter who came up with them, the only thing that matters is how much the idea improves the site.
Chess.com allowing people to play on its site for free isn't an act of charity, it's a business decision. People are much more willing to give the site money if they have used it for a while. Just by actively posting in this thread I am contributing to the community. And the stronger the community is, the more money they make.
Perhaps the reason why you can't make a living off of educational gamesis because there is a tiny market for them.
paul211 wrote:
I always thought that on this site suggestions from all members, premium members,those that pay for a membership at different levels, and those that have a free ride as they cannot afford it, are welcome.
Ideas come from all membership levels and do you suggest that the non-paying members should not propose or ask for anything more or new is just very disconcerting to me. I am positive that at times requests from non-paying members can benefit all members and furthermore can entice a non-paying member to buy a premium membership at any level if her/his request is supported by the community at large.
On another topic, I feel very strong about not counting any games below 5 moves and furthermore I have suggested previously not to count any games with less than 10 to 15 moves in the rating unless there is a checkmate.
The purpose here is not to accumulate points in ratings but rather than to account for a game played, not abandoned because of vacation ot time limit or simply resignation.
There is no honor to accumulate points for a 3 to 10 or so moves in a game.
I'm assuming you haven't played speed chess. An entire game can be decided at the start. I don't think it's very fair that people can premove 4 moves just to get a time edge over the opponent and resign if they realized they gave up a minor piece in the progress with no point change.
I'm not saying it's a huge issue, it's just something I would like to see changed in the future and that is the point of this thread.
I feel bad for people who lose the game because their internet disconnects
10 cents is less than I find on the sidewalk everyday.
RoffleMyWafflez wrote:
PeterThePawn wrote:
IF discussing other members values has any value, I think the bigger issue is this:
A Non-paying member wants something for free.
Well, big surprise there. Everybody wants software/code for free. As a software developer myself, it pains me every time I hear someone wishing their software was free. Perhaps that's why I can't make a living making educational games anymore. People don't want good code - they want Free free free!
Well guess what!... Sometimes you get what you paid for!
Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining that you're not a paid member, but to be asking for favors ahead of the needs of those who "pay the bills", perhaps that's the deeper social issue here - not the "10 cents a month" issue.
But hey! It's a "free" country, right?
Woah, I don't where this came from. I'm giving suggestions to improve the site. The nicer the site is, the more money chess.com makes. It doesn't matter who came up with them, the only thing that matters is how much the idea improves the site.
Chess.com allowing people to play on its site for free isn't an act of charity, it's a business decision. People are much more willing to give the site money if they have used it for a while. Just by actively posting in this thread I am contributing to the community. And the stronger the community is, the more money they make.
Perhaps the reason why you can't make a living off of educational gamesis because there is a tiny market for them.
Try making a video game with cool graphics and some violent zombie killing
i like that they only start on the second move.