Tie votes in vote chess

Perhaps only moves are considered above 10 percent of the team etc.

I'm all for everyone's vote being displayed after they vote, regardless if they voluntarily post a comment or not on what they voted for. However, I've asked chess.com about this proposed feature and they did not seem overly enthused about it.

Sooner or later there's always going to be "drive by voters" who do not read anyone's comments and do not make any comments themselves, they just vote for whatever they happen to feel like and if anyone else doesn't like it that's just TS (in their mind I presume).  And it's also very likely they won't read any news items or messages sent to them about driveby voting, or if they do read them they promptly roundfile the message and forget all about it. After all, it's only a game, right? :=(

Hi NimzoRoy!  It's been a long time... :)

At the time I posted this forum for comment, I took vote chess much more seriously than I do now, since that was the only chess I was playing at the time.  The early vote for a bad move winning in a tie situation has happened only once in all the vote chess games I have played.  At this point, I feel it is the responsibility of the team (if they care enough about it) to have a captain, or do whatever, to take precautions against this type of thing.  Someone had a suggestion that the captain should reserve his vote until the end of the voting period, so that he could break a tie if necessary.  I have found that vote chess teams with captains play better games on the whole, and the process is more enjoyable, than those without.  There is always more constructive and educational discussion going on, which is one of the main reasons I play vote chess.

I've played a lot of TVC for 2 groups and there's been small but steady problems with driveby voters (DBVs) in both groups.  It's really hard to find them because they never state what move they're voting for and apparently never post any comments as far as I can tell. The Capts sometimes won't make a difference by voting last not because of DBVs but because of bozos who vote for lame moves early on because some other bozo (me in too many cases) recommended a move without expecting everyone else to take it super-seriously minus any analysis of their own.

Vote chess only makes sense when you have a real group. These games that are played by 2000 people are interesting to observe, but tend to kill the poor Guys or girls that want to play à winning game. One Guy said it was like herding cats in à bath tub. There were à couple à young great players that really went bonkers from defending their analysis to the drunk, ignorant, spammer, dwarf, passer by, ... No team, no use...

I agree with bronsteinitz and he also forgot to point out that cheaters can ruin a Team Vote game for everyone. I played on a BIG chess.com team vs GM Onischuk (currently #3 highest-rated player in USCF) and one of our most active team members was expelled for cheating well into the middlegame. The game was drawn but of course is tainted by this one cheater out of a few thousand players. (Of course there may have been more but this guy was very vocal, vegetableman or vegtablehead or whatever his name was) And in one of my groups here a very active and high-rated TVC player was expelled for cheating recently, but of course no one believes THEIR group members or pals were cheating!

Who is to decide which of the 2 moves that tie get made?  Will that require another vote?  

As it stands, the move that was first voted on is the move the computer makes.  That was what I was questioning at the very beginning of all of this. :)

I saw what you wrote, hence my question, since the computer make the vote by the fist tobe there, and a tie with a better second vote, who would decide which move gets to be made if that were possible.  Would it require a second vote or does the SA get the deciding vote???

I think that a set amount of players should have to agree to play. If they have to drop out, another from our team should be able to vote in their place. If an odd # of players is always used and a sub is used for drop outs, the entire problem is avoided.

Also, as a fail safe, We should be able to have Super Admins that can cast a special vote to offset any ties. I hate to ask a Super Admin to never vote, except for special votes, but perhaps we could have some sort of rotating basis for the Super Admin who only casts tie breaking votes. In this way, everyone can have a turn to participate.

I think using the first vote is dumb because, often teams figure out they are going wrong and change their idea, trying to overturn their own vote.

With drive by voting or a mouse slip, the last vote can be equally as harmful.

Why a set amount when anyone on the team may play...

It would be the first best step to avoid tie votes

Not necessarily

That wont work either.  You want it to be less than a vote chess game that anyone can join and vote their move.  You want to control the game like its a corporation.  Anyone may play, they get one vote.  They get to exercise that one vote....  

I appreciate the attempt to show me my short sightedness....do you mind elaborating. I fear I have been misunderstood.

I did have an abusive now banned former member throw me out of a practice game with no warning for trying to reason strategy. He was an engine user and was arrogant. I disagree with allow SA's to have absolute power. They should need to get staff approval. With games lasting as long as they do, I don't see an issue with that.

The problem is that anyone may come and go all durning the game unless they hit the leave the game button.  They may not re-join the game after that. Other members of the team may join durning any portion of the match by just signing on.  Those that leave but dont push the leave the game button, are still in the match and remain in it as a registered player even if they dont vote for a move when they leave.  They may come back at anytime and vote then.  Most teams, all members never vote for every move but are still registerd players.  How would you know when someone left?  They wont give any SA 2 votes in the same game I fear.  That why the computer does it now by what it see's...  

If they come into the game, they may vote for a move that they would like to see made.  That wont be changed. 

It called vote chess for a reason, there is no such thing as anonymous voting. Just votes that you may disagree with. 

They wont allow any SA to remove someone from a vote chess game because someone makes a move the SA or team member doesnt like. It sorta deafeats the purpose of vote chess.  

Ah, you want the votes to be published.  Sorry, didnt know thats what you meant.  Wasn't that clear up there... They wont add that either, we asked that many times....