It could also be useful in helping SA's notice potential cheats in their groups too.
Allow SA to se who voted for what and when
Sort:
good point, I hadn't thought about it that way.
this is a waste of time IMO
nameno1had wrote:
It could also be useful in helping SA's notice potential cheats in their groups too.
How would one detect cheating from the moves a player votes for?
We have had games in the past (okay at least one) where people deliberately vote for dumb moves to make a certain team lose. If SA's see that someone voted for such a dumb move as say, bungling the queen when they were told what to vote, they could suggest that that account be closed.
Timothy_P wrote:
when they were told what to vote
uh huh. "You have a vote... so long as you vote what I tell you to!" Might want to take a look at http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vote
Berder wrote:
Timothy_P wrote:
when they were told what to vote
uh huh. "You have a vote... so long as you vote what I tell you to!" Might want to take a look at http://www.thefreedictionary.com/vote
And there lies the problem with "vote chess".
It needs a name change, some groups work very hard to try play this version properly, and if the group has a rule that discussion and consensus must take place, then members who dont want to comply and excercise their "free vote" should be able to be identified and kicked.
Change the name to consultation chess, that's what it is. It's not a bloody democracy.
rooperi wrote:
It's not a bloody democracy.
Democracy is a good thing.
Berder wrote:
rooperi wrote:
It's not a bloody democracy.
Democracy is a good thing.
It's a great system of government for homogenous nation with a common purpose.
It has no place in science, the workplace, on the sportsfield, or in chess.
yes berder agree with your sentiments exactly. people that want to waste their time in VC with stupid moves are definitely in the minority. let's just move on here and stop being so facist
rooperi wrote:
It's a great system of government for homogenous nation with a common purpose.
What exactly do you mean by a "homogenous" nation? Culturally homogenous?
And what do you mean by "common purpose"? Sounds like you are talking about single-party rule. Not really a democracy.
A real democracy takes a diversity of viewpoints from people of all walks of life, who are free to express their opinion and vote as they like.
If an SA were to analyze games and notice a particular player was always suggesting really high level moves and post analysis showed they were always the best Houdini had to offer, it would be a red flag.... a few SA's have already brought chess.com's attention that one of their players were always suggesting fishy moves....it has helped in some players being banned for cheating
Not really. Nations with widely divergent views - say, the U.S. in 1860 - don't tend to produce collaborative and functional governments. There has to be a certain amount of common ground. If not, there is either decentralization to the point of passivity (see later history of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), or secession.
ivandh wrote:
Not really. Nations with widely divergent views - say, the U.S. in 1860 - don't tend to produce collaborative and functional governments. There has to be a certain amount of common ground. If not, there is either decentralization to the point of passivity (see later history of Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth), or secession.
What are you saying, do you want to suppress "divergent views" i.e. the right to dissent, speak freely, and vote as a free citizen? Do you think a totalitarian repressive state is better than people being able to voice discontent and act on what they see is right? Democracies do not always result in perfect outcomes and sometimes they have civil wars, but they're better than all the other forms of government that have been tried.
Wow, sorry if my divergent view upset you. To answer your questions, no, I am not a rabid autocratic idiot.
Is that the new Monti government?
ivandh wrote:
Wow, sorry if my divergent view upset you. To answer your questions, no, I am not a rabid autocratic idiot.
Alright, sorry.
There should be a feature where Super Admins of a group could see what every member of the group voted for and the time that they voted in a vc game that the group is participating in. This would result in an effective tool to deter drive-by voting, and allow a higher quality of play in VC.