That sounds like a fun idea. Good luck with it Kevin. :•)

Thanks :-)

i take it that it wasnt just me that couldnt get on last night ? (with the game time suspended is the only clue)

It was everyone.

I was thinking about setting up a simple ladder for the BK reversi players similar to the GT ones, one ladder per variation.
If you are interested, please let me know in one way or another.
It would be set up on my website and accesable from BK. But the games would have to started manually etc.

Steve

If you are a knight or a pawn and do not have room to enter this tournament and would like to pm me with your nic & Id # We will get you in. Thanks ;•)

I would like to publicly thank Linda for setting up this tournament and her hard work with Fencer to allow those pawns and knights with full limits of games to enter this tournament through them. I think it is a great idea and I think we will get well beyond 100 players. I encourage all to join this tournament and throw your 5 bucks into the pot. 5 bucks is like 2 new release DVDs at the video store. So chip in. Also I am also adding, that if I should get lucky and win the tournament, I want to donate the 50 bucks to the boost a pawn program that Linda has to get some more pawns memberships. If you know someone who is a pawn and would like a membership and cant afford it, ask them to get in touch with Linda or get their permission to have their ID turned into Linda. I think this is also a great idea. GO BRAINKING!!!!

If I remember correctly, I was thinking Fencer liked the idea of possible having different "ratings" or ladders and such.

Then again, maybe I'm just wishfully thinking!

Brian thank you for your kind words I was touched.;•) I love this place and spend a lot of time here. When you extend a helping hand it comes full circle. Thanks it's not just me that does this. I have some great people behind me helping every step of the way. I 2nd it. GO BRAINKING.

I wasnt starting a coversation about ladders so the post could disappear down the page, I was saying I would run one if there is enough interest.

I know Fencer is happy with them but I think they are probably a low priority on his to do list at the moment.

Could you please explain (simply) what the ladders system is all about ? how it differs from ratings ? I don't play at other sites where they have this, so have no idea how it works.. cheers :0)

c&p'd BBW post just for Niki ;o)

Overview of ladders. (each system is a little different, but here is an overview)

Everyone starts at the bottom of the ladder - "Rung 1" (or Rung 10 depending on the ladder)

For each 2 people on Rung 1, they play the game. The winner moved up, the loser moved down (or stays at the bottom)

Then when 2 players are on Rung #2, they play. The winner will go to Rung #3, the loser will go back down to Rung #1.

That's the basics of a ladder system.

thanks for that :)
so why do people like this system ? is it seen as more accurate ?

I like it because its like on ongoing tourny, I dont know about accuracy

Is everybody on it that plays the type of game, or are you only part of it by request ?

Players would need to request to be in mine

Thanks for all that.. sorry if they were inane questions.. pure ignorance :)
Also just realised that you've been referring to reversi, so actually nothing to do with me ! LOL.. but if you ever do one for 5 in line, yes, I'd be interested please ! :0)

Questions are good Niki, it gets answers for everyone :o)
Well if theres enough interest in a 5 in line one, I could do it cos I like that game too LOL

One of the reasons oft quoted for not persuading the thousands of people who currently use this site free to contribute, was the innability to accept small amounts (costing more to collect than their value).
If as it seems possible to accept $5 entry fees without penalty... WHY NOT LEVY A SIMILAR CHARGE ON THE PAWNS?
Is it seriously being suggested that there are not at least 1000 of these people able and willing to make such a payment?
Once again those who pay are getting a sub standard service. I have limited time now so when I do have time, access would be nice.
Again I say ... restrict the capabilities of those who dont pay to allow those who do to get value for money.
It might also persuade those who freeload (can pay, wont pay) to either depart or shell out.

I agree with you Noho, a problem is perhaps the fees for small amounts?
But I think too a free account is a very nice thing,but if there is no money for a new technique it is bad for us all! I am for a small amount for pawns, for instance 6 € in the year,or they should can play only unrated games after an half year.

Playing only unrated games for pawns is not a bad idea.

OR, how about all pawn non-tournament games be unrated (not counting towards rating for either player)

For tournaments, let the games against Pawns count towards ratings, but just don't "show" the pawns rating in any list. Let it add up in the background, and if someday that pawn become a paid member, then those tournament games that were already played could then be included in the ratings list.

A pawn would still be able to play their games here, but without paying, they will not know how they stack up!.

(Downside is when joinging tournament for a range of rated players - for example, under 1500 tournament)

Good side - A person could not create a pawn account and just play private games with them to help their ratings.

But a only small amount for pawns makes sense, therewith we do not lose too many players.
If only the half of the pawns pay 6 € in the year we have no more problems..

What's the point? People dont play to get a rating, they play because it's fun. If pawns dont have ratings how are we meant to judge their suitability as opponents unless we trawl through all their finished games. I think it's a looney idea, you might just as well get rid of ratings all together.

If a Pawn can afford $5 to join a prize tourney then they can afford a $5 membership.
If a viable collection method exists then why cant it be used to levy revenue.
In fact why not make a one off registration fee for pawns now .. never to be charged again...?

I believe you could still judge their suitability as opponents by looking at their win/lose stat. If they lost 200 chess games, and won 5 - well you could easly tell that they are probable not too good at Chess.

"People dont play to get a rating" - well some do, or they would not cheat to try to get their ratings higher. The way they cheat is by using free pawn accounts, and this would just take that away.

And if they are playing just for fun, then they don't need their ratings anyway! :-)

I like ratings - I try my best to keep my ratings good while at the same time have fun!

Playing only unrated games after some time for non-paying members is the most used restricton on other chessservers..

I'm not worried about how they feel about their ratings, ratings are a convenience for prospective opponents. Fine in the example at 2.5 percent it's clear, but this depends on their opposition, it's also at an extreme, there can be medium level payers with quite disparate percentages or the opposite effect can also pertain.

Commonality is no guarantee of apposition, rather the converse in my experience.

..and they mostly must have the opinion to get more paying members with this mode.

The remarkable feature of this site is member involvement but the members are separate from the business angle. To maintain the present nature of the sight we (the members) need to support the business side without it over-running the social.

Caissus writes:
"Playing only unrated games after some time for non-paying members is the most used restricton on other chessservers"

But how, assuming it's factual, does this translate in net revenue production? What chess playing pawn is going to be compelled to buy a membership here because of the simple prospect of losing his rating status? Rather, it seems more likely he'd just go find another of the hundreds of free chess sites already on the internet.

Ughaibu : the remarkable feature of this site is especially,that it is often down and it needs more money for a new server.
Pioneer: I am sure some pawns will leave, but I am sure too that some others will buy a small membership and than the site has more money to buy a new server and we,the paying members have a site with a better technique.
Other ideas are welcome too, I think.

I see you here often when I'm here despite the server problems, I think you like this site, am I wrong?

This site is both a good games site and excellent social experience.
The memberships of all levels wish the site to retain its flavour.
The current server troubles are a major source of grievance and need resolving.
What is needed is sufficient revenue to allow the hardware upgrade.
The only point of dissention appears to be how this is achieved.
Options
1) Get more from those who already support.
2) Get more paying members.
3) Get those who currently do not pay to contribute.

Have I missed anything?

Helping Brainking Tourney
Stevie's Dollar Donation per player Reversi

Hi all, for every player who enters this tourney ,I will donate 1 dollar to Brainking. So more pawns and Knights can join in, I have set 1 game each and max 5 slots needed (means 2 games each colour too). If less than 15 players, I will donate 2 Dollars per player. Have fun and enjoy the games :o)

Would be nice if I could find 1 or more players who are willing to donate the same amount, to double or treble the money etc :o)

If someone does not like the site, why would they be here?

Quite but those who like the site need to exercise care with ideas that might alter it's nature, ie behaving as other sites do.

http://www.brainking.com/game/Tournaments?trg=2214&tri=7247

can you look at this Fencer it is a four way tie in Section 1 ;)

Fixed.

thxs :)

Ughaibu:You are right,I like this site and I am here despite the serverproblems too.
Even so the site would be better without serverproblems, am I wrong? And I think this would sure not change the "nature" of the site.

Thank you Steve R for your offer with your tournament. I am going to be doing good to squeeze in the backgammon prize tourney. If I have some room I might do the reversi thing too.. Reversi is not my strong suit but it is for a good cause.

if pawns only could play in unrated games, I personally would avoid playing all pawns!!! I prefer rated games. A change of this sort would limit potential opponents greatly for me...

i think the idea was not to display there ratings , they would still have one but they couldnt see it unless they paid membership

"If as it seems possible to accept $5 entry fees without penalty... WHY NOT LEVY A SIMILAR CHARGE ON THE PAWNS?
Is it seriously being suggested that there are not at least 1000 of these people able and willing to make such a payment? "

Maybe 1000 are, but how do you choose 1000 to levy the charge on? Even if 5000 are able does not mean every pawn is able (&& can justify the personal cost/value ratio).

now THAT is a good idea...for the $5 - give them 30 games, allow them to join 5-10 fellowships, still calling them pawns but with a star next to their name or some such thing...Good one Lythande...but then on 2nd thoughts, if they can afford $5 for the game then Lindas tourney should have 1000 people in it and it isnt looking as healthy as that at the moment. But then they do have till the end of March to sign up so things could change :)

Just as a side note, I did some calculating on Febuary 17th, and here are a few numbers I came up with.

During the past month, only 2,300 users were active (Total Rook + Knight + Pawns)

During the past few days, only 1,700 total were active (Rooks + Knights + pawns)

(now my guessing part) - Out of those numbers, I would guess around 360-390 are paid members, with the rest pawns.

I would still like to know what this raised money will be purchasing...and will it fix the problem?

I am not sure how the statistics were gathered but they make interesting reading... It bears out the snapshot that suggests that at any given time a third of players online are paying members... surely giving the paying members priority (ie in overload disconnect longest pawns on then the problem is solved. people who are enjoying the site free can hardly complain and the people who fund the site get value for money...

Fencer please explain why not?