Her gender is somehow relevant here? This was a chess game challenge. No funny comments or remarks. Simply a challenge that she declined, then she sent me a message (or maybe the message was part of the decline, I cannot recall) asking if we can play a game with 14 days per move, and then she sent me a challenge with 14 days per game. I accepted her challenge. She disabled chat. So before you portray this as my being all over her, please recall that she played some role in bringing this game about too; in fact, one could argue, a greater role than I did.
Terminating a Game
Sort:
That part was said in a sort of ironic way. I do not think that my rate of weird encounters is unusually high. My sheer number is, since I have never felt myself beholden to these artificial "us" and "them" lines that so many others draw up all over the map. I do not confine myself to only those who are already friends, and the result is very good and very bad. I make new friends all the time. I also make new enemies all the time, just from putting myself out there.
"Moaning" is your characterization, not mine, and I could argue that it is not an accurate one. I did not name names. I had a specific purpose in posting this, namely to find out how to terminate a game. I felt that I had poetic license to provide some background information. There is no screaming for vengeance, no four letter words, no fury, no animosity.
OK, to be clear, it is my post, and not the incident it describes, that you find unsettling? I had something to say, so I said it, and that bothers you?
Vance917 wrote:
OK, to be clear, it is my post, and not the incident it describes, that you find unsettling? I had something to say, so I said it, and that bothers you?
Well, the post did bother me because I don't see why one would abort a game just because the chat is turned off. Hurt feelings? 
At first, yes, I was taken aback by it. After a few hours, that effect has worn off, but I am still struck by a sense of "What is the point?". My reasoning may be hard to explain briefly, but I will try. It is not that I expect to become friends with every opponent. But there is always at least that possibility. Here, however, there is not even the possibility. That avenue has been completely shut off. So I am essentially playing against the computer. Not a bad way to spend time, but there is an opportunity cost, in that the same time can be spent playing chess with someone who may become a friend. So why would I want to waste time with someone who has slammed that door in my face?
Vance917 wrote:
At first, yes, I was taken aback by it. After a few hours, that effect has worn off, but I am still struck by a sense of "What is the point?". My reasoning may be hard to explain briefly, but I will try. It is not that I expect to become friends with every opponent. But there is always at least that possibility. Here, however, there is not even the possibility. That avenue has been completely shut off. So I am essentially playing against the computer. Not a bad way to spend time, but there is an opportunity cost, in that the same time can be spent playing chess with someone who may become a friend. So why would I want to waste time with someone who has slammed that door in my face?
You were not playing against a computer, but against a human being who wanted to play chess and not waste time on chatting. Why is this so difficult to ACCEPT?
CBA wrote:
Because, amazing as it might be, some people might just want to play chess. Some kids might not be allowed to respond. Some men might be bored with people who take things too seriously. And some women may be sick and tired of being harassed by people who want a game, but not as much as they want some personal information.
If you are playing someone who does not wish to speak, that is NOT the same as playing a computer. It is merely someone who does not wish to speak to you. Can you see the difference? Slamming the door in your face? No, it's merely a tick box.
To my amazement I have made a fair few "friends" on this site - some I talk to regularly and some who I've already forgotten (and I'm sure that's mutual). However, these people are not necessarily "real" friends - just as someone who doesn't want to talk is not a "real" oddball. This is a chess site where, thankfully, you can have as much - or as little - interaction as you want. And I for one won't criticise anyone for doing just that.
Exactly! You took the words from my mouth
CBA wrote:
Phobetrix wrote:
CBA wrote:
Because, amazing as it might be, some people might just want to play chess. Some kids might not be allowed to respond. Some men might be bored with people who take things too seriously. And some women may be sick and tired of being harassed by people who want a game, but not as much as they want some personal information.
If you are playing someone who does not wish to speak, that is NOT the same as playing a computer. It is merely someone who does not wish to speak to you. Can you see the difference? Slamming the door in your face? No, it's merely a tick box.
To my amazement I have made a fair few "friends" on this site - some I talk to regularly and some who I've already forgotten (and I'm sure that's mutual). However, these people are not necessarily "real" friends - just as someone who doesn't want to talk is not a "real" oddball. This is a chess site where, thankfully, you can have as much - or as little - interaction as you want. And I for one won't criticise anyone for doing just that.
Exactly! You took the words from my mouth
You have my humblest apologies!
....which are most humbly accepted
YVHS,
Musashi
CBA wrote:
I now have to bow my head in shame and admit I have no idea what YVHS stands for. Forgive me. I am older than my picture suggests.
According to google: Ygnacio Valley High School, but
according to olde British standards:
YVHS = Your Very Humble Servant
CBA wrote:
As an olde Briton, I should have known that. Shame upon shame. Nice to meet you though.
Well, olde Briton, do you want to chat all the time or do you want to play chess?
(nice to have "met" you, too)
Hello Vance, I read this post and I find interest. Please, how did you know you were playing against computer and not person? Is this allowed? It does not sound to me to be good chess playing.
trysts wrote:
peachbelle wrote:
Seems a lonely kind of life, and I'm sure she has her reasons...but I agree that it's not normal, and you're probably right that she doesn't have any, or many friends. My guess is that she probably has a trust issue.
This is absurd. "Lonely", "not normal", "doesn't have any...friends". You drew all these conclusions from disabling chat? Hilarious!
Thanks for warning us Vance, that when somebody accepts a chess game with you they risk being ridiculed for no reason whatsoever...
"After all, one never knows whom (or what) one will encounter here on Chess.com."
I'm on Team Trysts all the way in this whole discussion. Go team!
VanMan wrote:
Hello Vance, I read this post and I find interest. Please, how did you know you were playing against computer and not person? Is this allowed? It does not sound to me to be good chess playing.
I did not mean that literally. I just meant that playing against a mute is tantamount to playing against a computer.
Jul 15, 2010
0
#57
rnunesmagalhaes wrote:
trysts wrote:
peachbelle wrote:
Seems a lonely kind of life, and I'm sure she has her reasons...but I agree that it's not normal, and you're probably right that she doesn't have any, or many friends. My guess is that she probably has a trust issue.
This is absurd. "Lonely", "not normal", "doesn't have any...friends". You drew all these conclusions from disabling chat? Hilarious!
Thanks for warning us Vance, that when somebody accepts a chess game with you they risk being ridiculed for no reason whatsoever...
"After all, one never knows whom (or what) one will encounter here on Chess.com."
I'm on Team Trysts all the way in this whole discussion. Go team!
I'm glad the OP invited more people into the discussion
I have never blocked any users before, despite some pretty rude behavior towards me. I do not take such a step lightly. But congratulations, you four, for hijacking this thread you all now get the distinction of being the first. Good bye.
It happens to me something like that...not really the same...
I started a tournament...and after the 2nd move the player has disabled the chat box....I thought I did that for mistake...but in 3 years...it didn't happen me to disable the chat box for mistake...
At the 2nd game....I waited to see if he would do that again...Yes...he did it...
Sorry....perhaps my fault is being a Mediterranean woman...but I don't really feel confortable to play with such people...Now I'm waiting to loose my game on time..
I really can't understand the behaviour of this woman....If she doesn't want to play is better to say" NO"....Is terrible to do all this story for a chess game...We suppose to be playing in a serious chess site.....Fortunatly that doesn't happen often....
That may be it then. But there is no record of the game at all. Like it never happened. I wonder if there is some abort distinct from resigning.