 |
|
 BrainKing.comBoard for everybody who is interested in BrainKing itself, its structure, features and future. If you experience connection or speed problems with BrainKing, please visit Host Tracker and check "BrainKing.com" accessibility from various sites around the world. It may answer whether an issue is caused by BrainKing itself or your local network (or ISP provider). World Of Chess And Variants (videos from BrainKing): YouTube Chess blog: LookIntoChess.com You are not allowed to post messages to this board. Minimum level of membership required for posting on this board is Brain Knight. Mode: Everyone can post
<< < 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 > >> 24. July 2004, 22:43:05  My mistake! The 'edit' button is next to their name in the fellowship list. If you press that, it should give you the option to turn them into a 'member', and that should take away their captain status. 24. July 2004, 22:41:22 Antje, next to where it says 'captain', can't you use the edit button?
Otherwise its as Crissie says, you'd have to remove them from the fellowship. Maybe with a note to explain why? 24. July 2004, 22:28:53  i thought of that Crissie, to remove him from the fellowship. i havent done that yet (to anyone) i suppose thats the only way? 24. July 2004, 22:25:09 i wonder if you just go to the remove player option, and remove them if it would delete them as captain as well... just a thought :) 24. July 2004, 22:23:04 anyone able to help me on this? I have someone in my fellowship who has let their rook expire, (now a pawn). I need to remove that player from captain status on a team so i can add a new one. im not able to change his status from manager to member, and im not able to edit his captain status either. suggestions? 24. July 2004, 20:40:04 Subject: thank you :) Modified by danoschek (24. July 2004, 20:40:18) I know it's an extra feature and no simple adjustment,
appreciating that you'll keep it in mind ... :") ... ~*~ 24. July 2004, 20:38:48  There are more important things to do at the moment. When they are finished, I might look at it. 24. July 2004, 20:35:02 Subject: So again Modified by danoschek (24. July 2004, 20:39:11) will you finally do something about that flaw in the tournament logic ?
I mean - uhhhm neat that you think the one who loses is qualified, many of my opponents would support that *grin* but that does not fix the reality problem ... ~*~ 24. July 2004, 19:11:58 Thanx Bernice -- I would, but I'm happy enough with the little things in life, I possess no need to belong to anything or climb to the top of a browny hill and scream at the farmland below ~ until next... 24. July 2004, 18:42:15 Subject: builderq that's the way it is ... as mentioned, inessential if a valid direct comparison exists. ~*~ 24. July 2004, 18:37:29 Maybe there should be negative S-B, in which losses to weaker players matter more than to stronger ones? 24. July 2004, 18:18:13 Subject: you made it for me spammo attacks are just another problem every game server suffers ~*~ 24. July 2004, 18:17:14 I think Dano is trying to make a point about something LOL 24. July 2004, 18:15:38 Subject: before spammo attacks bury the original here the text - thanks Jason, for an opinion after all - excited LJ playing in my group should not be considered to be having an own one, naturally Modified by danoschek (24. July 2004, 18:15:59) Another Flaw in the Tournaments
23. July 2004, 16:56:54 Simply said, an SB-Value is often pure humbug in small groups, Much better to take the direct encounter as first choice - if just two are level, the one who won the game between them, should rank higher (for that time) - beyond any doubt. ~*~ 24. July 2004, 18:13:33 I see you joined all 5 of my tourneys
No skin off my nose, there are no prizes in those. FYI I had no idea those battleboats tourneys were yours or that you removed me. I couldnt care less for your tournaments. I only joined because it was about to start. I will not boot you from mine though. 24. July 2004, 17:49:46  longjohn , likes to creep in where not wanted . even tourneys hes been removed from 24. July 2004, 17:48:34 others may have a differing opinion.
In this case, Fencer has a duifferent opinion. Both are correct 24. July 2004, 17:46:59 Subject: It is clear and the only perspective. Modified by danoschek (24. July 2004, 17:47:15) direct comparison decides naturally, that's why it's handled that way worldwide but here. ~*~ 24. July 2004, 17:44:15 that is only one perspective.
Another argument could be made as to why the person that beat the other person lost to someone else that the other person beat. It is not a clear cut solution, it depends on the perspective it is looked though 24. July 2004, 17:41:25 Subject: of course it is, naturally Modified by danoschek (24. July 2004, 17:43:37) if just TWO are level, and one defeated the other,
he's beyond ANY doubt better that time, that group . ~*~ 24. July 2004, 17:37:38 Subject: Fencer what about the flawly tournament logic ? (23. July 2004, 16:56:54) ~*~ 24. July 2004, 15:37:53 cariad: Of course I am :-D
Backoff: She is with me :-) 24. July 2004, 14:47:53 hehe, that's right Cariad, turn his links aginst him :)
Ummm Fencer, does Lenra know where you are??? 24. July 2004, 12:35:03 It's fast even for me and I am currently in some small hotel in South Bohemia. There is only a forest and nothing else :-D 24. July 2004, 11:49:35 24. July 2004, 11:48:17 Its brilliant here!!!
*the fact I have a newer faster pc might be helping there!!!!! lol 24. July 2004, 10:57:56 still deadly slow..:(
having difficult playing games :( maybe shadowy figure is causing the problems hehehehe ***joking*** 24. July 2004, 10:41:13 UMMMMMM....shadowy....congrats on 1 year :) ....isnt it about time you upgraded....you can only be a bludger/freebie-rider for so long :)
welcome to the real world 24. July 2004, 09:08:59 Clock's just struck midnight here, that means it is now my 1 Year BK Anniversary -- Goodie goodie gumdrops!
Now if the site would just cooperate all the late-eggers could crawl back onto the web :) 24. July 2004, 09:04:26 Apparently by mere glancing at the post someone gave me hiccups *URP!* excuse me :P 24. July 2004, 08:23:07 same ole :( same ole :(
Is the site extremely slow again? pages taking forever to load...i have done all the vacuuming and dusting required LOLOL 24. July 2004, 07:51:49 Subject: fencer- the same bug?  I'm getting a red 1 by main page at all times now even though it's not my move in any games..i know this one has been reported before but it appears to have cropped up again.. 24. July 2004, 02:30:03 Subject: Re: It takes four games of one kind before that person will get a rating on those kind of games. 23. July 2004, 23:04:23 He probably gained more than you lost, but since he was still unrated after the game, you could not see the change. 23. July 2004, 22:46:22  I sure don't understand the rating system. Played a game with an unrated player, he won and I lost 109 bkr's but he gained nothing! 23. July 2004, 16:56:54 Subject: Another Flaw in the Tournaments Modified by danoschek (23. July 2004, 17:03:30) Simply said, an SB-Value is often pure humbug in small groups, Much better to
take the direct encounter as first choice - if just two are level, the one who won the game between them, should rank higher (for that time) - beyond any doubt. ~*~ 22. July 2004, 21:07:40 well whatever you did, it fixed my problem. Oh well, back to firefox! 22. July 2004, 20:19:13 Subject: I think - one or a few boards visible are an attraction perhaps bk.com, poetry, books (wink wink) or similary appealing ... 0:)
perhaps preferably with a trigon moderatorship, us/aus/eu ... ~*~ << < 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 > >> |
Date and time
Friends online
Favourite boards
Fellowships
Tip of the day
|
|
Copyright © 2002 - 2024 Filip Rachunek, all rights reserved. Back to the top |