Should Chess.com Change How Vacation Works? - Chess Forums - Page 10

Brian-E

Apr 16, 2019

0

#181

FedeBau schreef:

You have to draw a line in the sand somewhere. I just don’t think the line should be at 3 months.

Either optional or enforced we need some middle ground I think

Yes. Compromise is usually the way forward, and it applies here.

squaresun

Apr 16, 2019

0

#182

Amanda wrote:

Here are some thoughts I have, including some that were inspired by great suggestions from our users!

1) If you sign on to Chess.com, you are no longer "on vacation". This prevents vacation abuse.
2) Auto-vacation should at the very least be optional, if not done away with; some premium users do NOT want auto-vacation, and would rather have the option to "time out" unimportant games if busy.
3) I think people really do have a bit too much vacation time. And, I don't think it should scale with payment!

Cheers!,
Amanda

I agree with Amanda entirely, but will add something from some other members that I also support:

I believe also that vacation time should be equally divided among one's games. I had to wait over two months to play a game in a team match with an opponent. She was playing 746 games at the time and was (likely) using her vacation time to fend-off her game appointments/demands.

If a player is engaged in 50 games simultaneously and wants to use vacation time, then 2% of their time should be used on each game simultaneously. This formula may easily be applied to one's games regardless of number. This way if someone wants to play 1000 games simultaneously, no one will stop them, but vacation time will go by swiftly with numbers like these.

jessiemillano509

Apr 17, 2019

0

#183

Vacation can be abused. It should be eliminated. If you agreed to a one move per day game, you should honor it. I don't give a flying f--k if your cat died on the other side of the world. If you cannot make a move, blame your cat.

SmyslovFan

Apr 17, 2019

0

#184

@NelsonMoore, it's a couple days early, but I hope you have a joyous and kosher Pesach!

jdh1

Apr 17, 2019

0

#185

jdcannon wrote:

Chess.com is considering changing vacation and is seeking feedback from the community to help decide if we should.

Some things to consider:

Do we allow too much vacation?

Can you use too much vacation at a time?

Should it be limited to so much per game?

Post any ideas you have. Nothing is off the table

there should be a restriction on going on vacation within 3 days of going on vacation. I think that would help a lot

jdh1

Apr 18, 2019

0

#186

NelsonMoore wrote:

ChessinBlackandWhite wrote:

As someone who has played daily chess for quite a few years and has been both a premium and non premium member, here are my thoughts.

The maximum is too long, even though I can benefit from this, I think more than a month is just wasting everyone's time.

Auto vacation is one of the main reasons I have a membership, I really enjoy games with 24 or 48 hrs per move, but maybe a couple times a year something comes up unexpectedly and my vacation pops in for a day or two. I would suggest making the min amount of vacation used to be higher for the auto vacation. say an extra 24 or 48 hrs used, an "auto vacation time fee" of sorts. If someone is not using the auto vacation on a weekly basis then the extra time they lose from it will not be a problem at all. If they are using vacation so often that paying an extra 24 hrs for auto vacation to kick in matters, then these are the type of "abusive" situations we are trying to fix.

Playing with clock plus delay would have a similar effect though, if you go over the delay time you do not lose on time as long as the clock has not run down. So playing say 14 days with 48 hour delay allows you in essence to use 14 days of "vacation time" during the game. 28 days with 24 hour delay would allow you to use 28 days of "vacation time" during that game, but it would start counting down every 24 hours.

The only disadvantage to the site is people who get premium membership just for this feature, as it would apply to everyone. You cannot set a clock whereby one member gets more time than another (except perhaps unrated for handicap purpose and then I'd expect that only in live, or a player choosing to "berserk" in arena tournaments like they have on a different site).

The other "disadvantage" is that at present you cannot select certain games for vacation whilst playing in other daily games (the ones you're not losing) though you can come off vacation in all games, play moves quickly in the ones you're winning, then jump back on vacation.

I see these variations being useful for tournaments where they may set the clock to just 7 days with 36 hours delay so you have to "get on" with the games.

I disagree with adjudications, I did suggest a "play on against computer" whereby your opponent is replaced with a top engine, and that engine will play within 6 hours. If you have mate in 3 you'll have no problem beating the engine. If you're up by 1 pawn (other than an easy king+pawn endgame) you might not wish to use that option. (If you did and you lost, your opponent would be credited the win).

I completely agree that there should be an option to play against a to engine, and this should apply to live games as well when your opponent teases you by running out his clock, but I think that you should only be able to do that if your opponent has gone on. vacation.also,I think we must have a limit to how often you can begin vacation. i.e. you can't make a single move and immediately return too vacation. if you play any chess at all on the site, vacation should automatically turn off. this includes live games and tactics/puzzles/lessons. if you come to read articles in the site, you can remain on vacation time. for sure, the auto vacation must go. to go on vacation, you must manually set that. Also, in order to return on vacation, you must move in all your games at least once. another option is to put on the open challenges page the average time per move of the player issuing the challenge as sort of a rating of how likely they are to abandon you. players that have a average time per move that is above one day should not be allowed to issue one day challenges, players whose average is above one week should not be allowed to issue one week challenges, etcetera.that way slow moved can still play, but their opponent can know that they might play a slow opponent before the game begins.

FedeBau

Apr 18, 2019

0

#187

See This example:

https://www.chess.com/daily/game/224419728

What’s the sense of this? Vacations triggered automatically and it may very well be a case that this person won’t come back in 3 months.

The failsafe to auto-trigger vacations should be used for short term emergencies. Make it so that the player has 3 extra days to log in and re-affirm he wants to go on vacations or move in his games. If the player doesn’t do this, then vacations are removed and he/she looses on time.

Just to be clear this happens in every team and every competition. I’m not picking on this team or this person. I just happened to come across this example today.

pancho2015

Apr 18, 2019

0

#188

I think community is giving a lot of different and interesting proposal.

Is @jdcannon arriving to any conclusion of all this? Are you, jd?

JonasD

Apr 18, 2019

0

#189

FedeBau wrote:

The failsafe to auto-trigger vacations should be used for short term emergencies. Make it so that the player has 3 extra days to log in and re-affirm he wants to go on vacations or move in his games. If the player doesn’t do this, then vacations are removed and he/she looses on time.

I like this idea a lot!

Toire

Apr 18, 2019

0

#190

Dave wrote:

FedeBau wrote:

The failsafe to auto-trigger vacations should be used for short term emergencies. Make it so that the player has 3 extra days to log in and re-affirm he wants to go on vacations or move in his games. If the player doesn’t do this, then vacations are removed and he/she looses on time.

I like this idea a lot!

Having already stated that the only reason I pay for a Premium membership is automatic vacation time, I agree this is a sound idea; a compromise for both camps.

MGleason

Apr 18, 2019

0

#191

I like that too, although I might increase the auto-vacation limit from three days to seven.

FedeBau

Apr 18, 2019

0

#192

As long as the mechanism prevents situations were people just abandons their account, it will be a big step forward.

MGleason

Apr 18, 2019

0

#193

Also, vacation time should not kick in for premium members who get banned. Ideally any ongoing games should get immediately resigned, rather than waiting for them to time out.

FedeBau

Apr 18, 2019

0

#194

MGleason wrote:

Also, vacation time should not kick in for premium members who get banned. Ideally any ongoing games should get immediately resigned, rather than waiting for them to time out.

Agree.

ChessinBlackandWhite

Apr 18, 2019

0

#195

MGleason wrote:

Also, vacation time should not kick in for premium members who get banned. Ideally any ongoing games should get immediately resigned, rather than waiting for them to time out.

I would assume they time out to give a chance of appeal, since that is technically an option and I think a couple people have gotten their accounts back over the years. But I would say let it time out but no vacation

SmyslovFan

Apr 18, 2019

0

#196

Dave wrote:

FedeBau wrote:

The failsafe to auto-trigger vacations should be used for short term emergencies. Make it so that the player has 3 extra days to log in and re-affirm he wants to go on vacations or move in his games. If the player doesn’t do this, then vacations are removed and he/she looses on time.

I like this idea a lot!

So, if a person is hospitalized for a serious illness or lives in Puerto Rico during a hurricane and loses power, they can lose their game even though they have a fail-safe in place? I think it's a bad idea. The sentiment of protecting against over-long vacations just to drag out a lost position can be resolved with adjudications.

FedeBau

Apr 18, 2019

0

#197

So, if a person is hospitalized for a serious illness or lives in Puerto Rico during a hurricane and loses power, they can lose their game even though they have a fail-safe in place? I think it's a bad idea. The sentiment of protecting against over-long vacations just to drag out a lost position can be resolved with adjudications.

If sth like that happens, an online chess game is the least important thing in the world .

Still, no rule or mechanism will work for every plausible situation. Giving a week for the person to go live would cater for the vast majority of the situations where the player was genuinely and legitimately unable to log in while still preventing the abuse in many cases.

im not against adjudication ls. It just doesn’t seem realistic to me.

ChessinBlackandWhite

Apr 18, 2019

0

#198

If sth like that happens, an online chess game is the least important thing in the world .

Still, no rule or mechanism will work for every plausible situation. Giving a week for the person to go live would cater for the vast majority of the situations where the player was genuinely and legitimately unable to log in while still preventing the abuse in many cases.

im not against adjudication ls. It just doesn’t seem realistic to me.

A person waiting for another player's vacation to run out in a game does not have any more importance on that game, than the person in the emergency needing their auto vacation.

FedeBau

Apr 18, 2019

0

#199

ChessinBlackandWhite wrote:

If sth like that happens, an online chess game is the least important thing in the world .

Still, no rule or mechanism will work for every plausible situation. Giving a week for the person to go live would cater for the vast majority of the situations where the player was genuinely and legitimately unable to log in while still preventing the abuse in many cases.

im not against adjudication ls. It just doesn’t seem realistic to me.

A person waiting for another player's vacation to run out in a game does not have any more importance on that game, than the person in the emergency needing their auto vacation.

Full agree. What does matter much more is the extremely most frequent scenario of intentional and non-intentional vacation abuse which this adjustment would mitigate.

And don’t forget about non-premium members which don’t get any insurance.

FedeBau

Apr 18, 2019

0

#200

Right now the changes I would encourage are:

1) Players to accrue half the current time of vacation.

2) Vacation auto-triggered must be re-affirmed within a week by the user or it goes off.