Should Chess.com Change How Vacation Works?

Oh, the vacay time does recharge already? I was not aware of that. Sorry for my ignorance. lol

No, I disagree.  There are legitimate reasons for someone to want to take 2-3 days off several times a year, and there's no reason that should be made impossible.

There's already a 24-hour minimum; I don't see any need to increase that.

Was just trying to make it more annoying for abusers who move every day and then go back on vacation every day. So make it 2-3 day chunks then.

But maybe people who are committed to being [removed - MOD] wouldn't bat an eye, and just wait out their 2-3 days.

Yes, see here: https://support.chess.com/customer/en/portal/articles/1444787-how-does-vacation-work-how-much-time-do-i-get-?b_id=12321

You get more time on the 1st and 15th of every month.  Free members get one additional day (2 days per month), gold members get 1.5 days (3 per month), diamond and platinum members get 2.5 days (5 per month).

If the maximum is capped at 30 days, if the current recharge rate is left unchanged (and I see no reason to change it), it will take six months for a diamond member to fully recharge their vacation time after draining it down all the way.

You edit language like that? I didn't realize. It wasn't even that bad 

It's already annoying for them.  If they go on vacation every day, they're losing 24 hours of vacation time every day.  Even diamond members recharge at a maximum of 5 days per month.  So in a typical 30-day month, they're losing 25 vacation days every month.

Even with the current 90-day cap for diamond members, they'll still drain that to zero in just a few months - despite regularly making moves during that time.

30 days should be more than enough, as a premium member that would be something like 60 days a year if all is used and then recharged right? If you need more than a day a week, or need more than 2 month long stretches then daily chess is simply not the game for you

By your calculations it would take a maximum of 108 days to run out of vacation.

And lets say they're completely lost but not close to checkmate. As far as I know when you come back from vacation you have 24 hours to make a move. So they could additionally stretch it out roughly 1 day for every move they make. They could pretty easily add another 10 to 20 days like this. So they could stall about 120-130 days.

And you say these conditions are annoying the abuser? I think there should be changes. I like your idea of shortening the max time. Maybe also set a limit to how many times a person can go on vacation in 1 month. 3-4 times a month seems more than reasonable.

I don't like a limit to the number of times they can go on vacation over the course of a month, and I don't think it's necessary.  Even for a diamond member gaining 5 days per month, going on vacation more than four times will at a minimum mean they gain zero vacation time that month, even if each vacation is less than 24 hours.

The majority of cases of people constantly going on vacation are, I suspect, unintentional.  There are people with a huge number of active games, who are struggling to keep up and are getting bailed out by auto-vacation time when one of the games gets close to timing out.  These people are trying to play their games and aren't intentionally dragging them out, they just got overwhelmed with too many games (usually from joining too many tournaments).  That might be annoying for the opponent so it's fine to have the system discourage that, but it's not intentional abuse and shouldn't be penalised as if it was.

I think decreasing the maximum vacation time from 90 to, say, 30 days, should be sufficient.

Why shouldn't someone be penalized for accepting more games than they can play? 1 person diminishes the experience of 100 (sometimes closer to 1000) people.

But sure, cutting max time to 30 days would change a lot. I wouldn't be surprised if chess.com wanted to test a cut to 60 days first. 

Why not just penalize the ones that constantly go on vacation in losing positions? 

Yea...I know...what constitutes a losing position?

I for one have no desire to be penalized for using vacation, and I don't understand why everyone needs to be penalized for the actions of a few.

If someone has taken on more games than they can play, "penalizing" them will effectively mean making them lose all their games on time. Isn't that diminishing the experience of their opponents just as much as making them wait?

Reducing the max vacation time from 90 to 30 days is draconian in my opinion (though I'm with MGleason on all other points). A slight reduction in max vacation time might be okay, but not too much.

Would diminishing your max vacation time from 90 days to 30 really effect the way you play?

yea i am waiting for a loser to come back to the game he has set it vacation and i am unable to checkmate his aS s fool

Not at all, as i hardly play any daily chess here anyway.  My main point is why does everyone have to be penalized for the actions of a few?

But personally it doesn't matter to me how chess.com decides to deal with this.  The most vacation i have taken at once was 3 weeks when i went to London.  Usually my vacation a couple days here and there.

It's a good question. For me it would come down to whether a large majority are using a feature for abuse. If it's 50/50 then I can see your point, and any changes harsh enough to punish a lot of innocent users would be bad.

I think one of the main ideas behind reducing the 90 day max is it's an absurd amount. I've said for years that no one actually needs 90 days of vacation, and I've joked that Erik doesn't realize people with real jobs don't take a 1 month vacation 4 times a year (when you account for how fast vacation accumulates it's even more than this IIRC).

I work for a company that gives us unlimited vacation.  So yea...if i choose to i can take a lot of vacation.  Unless im taking a trip to the moon, that will never happen.  And since my daughter is no longer stationed in London, I don't see myself going back. 

It's only a small minority abusing it.  It's not even close to 50-50.  It's just that you don't usually notice most of the legitimate vacations.

And, btw, it doesn't accumulate fast enough to let you take 1 month vacations 4 times a year.  For a diamond/platinum member, it accumulates 5 days per month, which is 60 days per year.  You can only do four months of vacation in a year if you saved up from the prior year.

60 days of vacation per year is a lot, more than most people will legitimately use, but some people will legitimately use that much.  I don't think the current rate of accumulation for diamond members is bad.  It's the total it can accumulate to that I think is excessive.

Of the people who use it I mean. How many are using 90 days legitimately vs how many for abuse.

I know.

In fact if you saved up, you can (very nearly) do it for 2 years in a row.

I've said that for years, and I've never heard anyone seriously disagree.

You should have a set amount of Vacation time each year. Maybe 30 days a year?