#20 (2) We should have more increment tournaments. That way people can only waste the fixed time part, not the increment.
It would be interesting to compare the current system with systems from other chess sites, to see what can be improved.
Fine, by popular demand I guess I'll code the proposed patch and have Lichess reject it to get some comment on the situation... what a waste of effort.
Other sites:
* chess.com and other commercial sites have ads for people to become paying customers, and their player base either becomes paying customers or goes somewhere else.
* FICS and other noncommercial site moderators are overwhelmed and strictly enforce site policies.
Delays, not increments.
That is the solution I have proposed before.
Clock running-down is only an issue normally in slower time controls. In a blitz or bullet game, with little or no increment, your opponent will often flag but it is unlikely to be an intentional clock-running-down.
For those who don't know, the difference between delay and increment is with delay no time is ever added to your clock. If the time control is 1 minute with 10 second delay, your opponent can play in 10 seconds and not lose any time on the clock, but if they use more it comes off the 1 minute.
For a slower time control you can play 1 minute with 30 second delay (rapid) or even 1 minute with a minute delay (slow enough to be classic). But even in the last of those your opponent can never take more than 2 minutes on any move so you won't be hanging around for long if he quits.
My other suggestion, by the way, is to put the word "resigns" or whatever translation the user's locale is next to the flag button all the time, not just a tool tip. At least it will be clearer to any new joiner how to resign.
@tpr,
"Lichess should prevent people from starting a new game when another unfinished game is still in progress."
I respectfully disagree, on the grounds that this would waste even more of my time!
Typically, when my opponent leaves the match, I start another and play two at once, switching between tabs to see if he's returned or there's a Claim Victory button yet, but otherwise giving my attention to the new game. And I know of folks who deliberately host simuls on here; plus don't forget correspondence games, which can be ongoing for days. . . . So if you could only play one game at a time, this wouldn't be any kind of improvement, from my perspective or theirs; or I'm sure from your own, if you considered all the ramifications of such a hard limit.
In fact, it seems like this would penalize the victim more than the perpetrator. I expect we'd find a new sort of time waster, who never intended to play, but starts games just to keep others from playing, as this gives him some sort of power trip. ;(
@Doofenshmirtz you have some serious issues if you put people who take their time and cheating in the same category people can take their TIME IT IS THEIR TIME they can take as long as they want if you do not like it play shorter games who do you think you are or who does anyone else think they are telling players that they must move they have their time they can sit there for 3 hours if they want to it is like me saying i do not like they way you dress change you clothes now it is crazy and sick tbh.
@Toadofsky Thanks for offering to help out, but I'd like to go on record for saying you shouldn't have to do that, esp if it's just going to be a waste of time.
@Chessy64 I know what you're saying about people are entitled to the time allotted according to the style of game they've chosen. My sentiment is I wish I had some other option that was favorable to all the other players like myself that allows me to have something like 2 minutes per move up to a certain amount. I think it's long enough, and waiting for 2 minutes on someone who closes the browser isn't as annoying as the longer games. Then again, I'm low rated, so maybe I just don't understand how much time people really need to make moves in some situations!
#26,
With the possible exception of #20, we are not talking about people merely taking a long time to move in a critical position. We are talking about people closing their browser (rage quitting) -- so they aren't even present anymore -- or else spending 29 minutes of a 30-minute game on move 2, and only then playing again -- in the hope that you won't have noticed, and now they'll win on time instead of you. ;( This is an abuse of the system, and it happens with some regularity, at least at lower rating levels and in anonymous games.
You are quite right that one's time is one's own -- but this only bolsters the point of those complaining of their time being wasted. For better or worse, it is not an adequate defense of those who deliberately abuse their clocks.
@pawnedge I don't want to take the time away from someone really thinking about their move. (Wasting time is obvious when someone goes offline immediately after blundering a piece and then never comes back.) I also am sympathetic to someone who actually has network issues. That's why I don't like the idea of punishment so much--you can never REALLY know who had a network issue that was on purpose.
#27 Fair enough... either way, something valuable will be a public audit trail to indicate the extent of the problem. I've started identifying who these players are:
https://github.com/ddugovic/rust-pgn-reader/tree/clock reading PGN from https://database.lichess.org/
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.