alchab has opened an interesting poll on this subject which I'd like to discuss:
http://www.slowchess.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=722
Here are my initial thoughts:
I had been removing players who had been inactive at net-chess for a year, but it's been some time since I cleared out those records.
That is different from what has been suggested, which does merit some consideration. Al's suggestion is that after a period of inactivity on the ladders, players would be emailed a warning that they could be removed if the inactivity continued for a certain amount of time. Players who stand alone atop the rankings would necessarily be exempt from this as they can only play if challenged.
Some players have remained active at net-chess without ever forfeiting a ladder match, all the while inactive on the ladders unless in response to a challenge.
A happy medium might be that players who are inactive on the ladders for a year and have forfeited a match in that time will be removed...presently, any player who forfeits three consecutive matches is removed.
I'd like to get several different viewpoints before making a decision on this. Any input is appreciated.
Inactivity on ladders
invitation to be more active
Hi everybody,
I've been thinking about what I _really_ wanted with this poll (sometimes such things take their own time) and I think it is this: More activity on the ladders.
And therefore I would not anymore want to call it a 'warning' what I suggested to be sent to inactive people after a certain amount of time, but rather an _invitation_ to be a little more active.
reasons for my thoughts are:
1 It's no fun stepping on blind names, having to wait 14 days for the challenge to expire and then doing the same thing again.
2 The ranking is not what you'd think of it: a ranking representing the strength of the players, because there are a lot of weak players on top ranking places, whereas there seem to be strong players in the lower ranks.
3 Also, two or more true 2300+ players in front of me could block my activity for ever, since I am a 2100 and could not pass them. But if they'd have to get active again, they would of course challenge and move down those weaker players that are in front of them.
4 People who are active at the ladders only in response to a challenge may not care to be on the ladders -- they will be removed without them bothering. If they do care, then they just have to play one match per year, like everybody else (except, maybe, the person on No.1).
Advantages would be
1 All players would be obliged to play at least one ladder match per year and thus to confirm their rankings. This would be a nice improvement of the ladder life, I guess.
2 I think that the invitation I suggested would tell anybody about to be
removed that they decide about this matter (activity of mind
---------
If this could be done with a macro or something like that -- i.e. without putting a lot of work on Mike -- I'd appreciate that a lot.
Thanks for any answers.
Al (alchab)
I've been thinking about what I _really_ wanted with this poll (sometimes such things take their own time) and I think it is this: More activity on the ladders.
And therefore I would not anymore want to call it a 'warning' what I suggested to be sent to inactive people after a certain amount of time, but rather an _invitation_ to be a little more active.
reasons for my thoughts are:
1 It's no fun stepping on blind names, having to wait 14 days for the challenge to expire and then doing the same thing again.
2 The ranking is not what you'd think of it: a ranking representing the strength of the players, because there are a lot of weak players on top ranking places, whereas there seem to be strong players in the lower ranks.
3 Also, two or more true 2300+ players in front of me could block my activity for ever, since I am a 2100 and could not pass them. But if they'd have to get active again, they would of course challenge and move down those weaker players that are in front of them.
4 People who are active at the ladders only in response to a challenge may not care to be on the ladders -- they will be removed without them bothering. If they do care, then they just have to play one match per year, like everybody else (except, maybe, the person on No.1).
Advantages would be
1 All players would be obliged to play at least one ladder match per year and thus to confirm their rankings. This would be a nice improvement of the ladder life, I guess.
2 I think that the invitation I suggested would tell anybody about to be
removed that they decide about this matter (activity of mind
---------
If this could be done with a macro or something like that -- i.e. without putting a lot of work on Mike -- I'd appreciate that a lot.
Thanks for any answers.
Al (alchab)
Re: invitation to be more active
I do completely agree with Alchab, I am an enthusiastic player of the ladder and I do know what it means challenging people who are in the ladder but are not interested in playing. Personally I find the ladder very simulating since every match is a real contest to improve your game play. I think Al's proposal is quite ok. I would only suggest some rules about the time setting of the games (p.e. 15 days per move) and the possibility to postpone a game due to illness, vacation or any other special situation.
Cheers
Pedro aka escargot
Cheers
Pedro aka escargot
alchab wrote:Hi everybody,
I've been thinking about what I _really_ wanted with this poll (sometimes such things take their own time) and I think it is this: More activity on the ladders.
And therefore I would not anymore want to call it a 'warning' what I suggested to be sent to inactive people after a certain amount of time, but rather an _invitation_ to be a little more active.
reasons for my thoughts are:
1 It's no fun stepping on blind names, having to wait 14 days for the challenge to expire and then doing the same thing again.
2 The ranking is not what you'd think of it: a ranking representing the strength of the players, because there are a lot of weak players on top ranking places, whereas there seem to be strong players in the lower ranks.
3 Also, two or more true 2300+ players in front of me could block my activity for ever, since I am a 2100 and could not pass them. But if they'd have to get active again, they would of course challenge and move down those weaker players that are in front of them.
4 People who are active at the ladders only in response to a challenge may not care to be on the ladders -- they will be removed without them bothering. If they do care, then they just have to play one match per year, like everybody else (except, maybe, the person on No.1).
Advantages would be
1 All players would be obliged to play at least one ladder match per year and thus to confirm their rankings. This would be a nice improvement of the ladder life, I guess.
2 I think that the invitation I suggested would tell anybody about to be
removed that they decide about this matter (activity of mind
---------
If this could be done with a macro or something like that -- i.e. without putting a lot of work on Mike -- I'd appreciate that a lot.
Thanks for any answers.
Al (alchab)
