Well up to now moderators generally ask people to delete their own posts if someone messages to say they find it upsetting or offensive. The problem is I think (and this is only my opinion) that we have been a bit too trusting of people who say they're offended. This hasn't been a huge problem by any means though and its good we have caught it early.

One thing remains unclear:
Tuesday said some of her posts have been deleted while the moderators agreed that her posts have been OK with nothing wrong at them.
There is a contradiction right?

If i am a moderator and don't find anything bad at a post but delete it, then if i didn't delete it by mistake, i'm a moron and have to be replaced with someone better.....!

Naming people isn't a great idea, they feel the need to defend themselves then arguments and accusations start. Much better to keep posts neutral and inoffensive.
Tuesdays problem has been passed to the mod squad fellowship so all moderators can be aware of this particular action that some users have been taking lately. I don't think the person in question has any hold over moderators (to answer your question, Pythagoras), its more because moderators act when they are messaged saying someone found a post offensive. Its a shame that some members play on the good intentions of moderators and use this as a means to 'get at' someone they may dislike. Hopefully we'll find a middle ground where offensive posts are dealt with ASAP, while people claiming they are offended to cause problems are spotted and not allowed to abuse the system.

Pythagoras: I don't think that names are important...they know who it is....oh well,to each his/her own,lol....I know I don't try to offend peole on purpose...sometime I just blurt stuff out though,LOL!!!

Tuesday: Is he a moderator or even a global one? And if not, how he can affect so much the moderators in order to delete your posts.....?

Also i don't agree with this secrecy of you. Although it shows your decency and good manners, you should say who is this person....

anastasia: Reminds me of a story I read once about a Utopian society that had only two rules:

1. Thou shalt not bother anyone.

2. Thou shalt not be too easily bothered.

Tuesday: she's right...I was also aproached by a mod and said that she saw absolutly NOTHING wrong with my post but since this person didn't like it,she still took it down...I said ok,I didn't want to offend ANYONE and wasn't really sure how I WAS offending anyone,and she agreed,but still took it down...

Tuesday: If the mods disagree then don't worry about it!
I do know what you're talking about though, I'll put a note in the mod squad (for any mods that don't read this board) for them to keep an eye out for it happening. If you still have problems them PM a global.

Tuesday: good advice from Hrqls.

Tuesday: report it to a glob (or more than 1 if you dont think any glob can/will handle it)

dont post it on a public board, this will just start another flame war

Goonerg: I didn't.

rod03801: Well actually the Paid Membership page will only show you new memberships, and not any renewals of current members, so it is only goot at counting new members (or at least from pawn to knight/rook memberships)

Goonerg: did you really??!!?? lucky person you are!!

I got a 50% bonus.

I am curious what the stats are for the membership "action" for February. It would be interesting to know how many memberships were bought (information I know I can find by going to the "Paid Membersip" page) and how many of those got the random 50% added to what they bought.

ScarletRose: very clever

Click it good

Hrqls: I think it's a great idea too.

wekke: yes please...AWESOME idea!!!

Hrqls: I 2nd that idea.

are there any fellowship or team ratings or rankings ?

now there will be a lot more team tournaments/challenges it might be nice to view which team/fellowship ranks where in each game type :)

shagglbrox: The games will remain as they are, it won't affect them.

Fencer: The team I'm on is in a team tournament. The team I want to join will be doing a team match.

shagglbrox: Do you mean a normal tournament, a team tournament or a team match?

If I'm on a team for a fellowship involved in a tournament currently, and I want to leave the team to join the same game type team of another fellowship, what happens to any current games in my first fellowship's tourney?

There is a lot of discussion wanting to "do away with" auto-vacation, some component of the weekends and even possibly predetermined vacation days.

Firstly, I am pleased to hear Fencer will be revising at least some of these. One of my gripes is that auto-vacation days (and at times vacation days) are not actually vacations, they are just "non-time-out" days. A vavcation day, I beleive, should step EVERY game back 24 hours, not just delay the ones which were going to time out to not time out till the next day. All the present system does is give you twice as many games to catch up on the next day, hardly a vacation.

Secondly, I try not to use auto-vacation days but there are times when I simply cannot get on for some periods of time because I have work to do or like BBW am not near a computer which is quick enough to play many games - try playing Jarmo on dialup!. When these days occur I get online if I can and play a few games, but am not able to play them all, and yes i am selective about the games I play and don't alwyas make the decision on whether that particular game will time out - there are many deciding factors in which games I play, time left is only one. Play less games you say ... well I play the amount of games I am comfortable with for 95% of the time and rely on auto-vacation for the other times.

Thirdly, also as said before ... only play in the games you are comfortable with. I do not play any 1 or 2 day games. I do not play any fischer clock games. I do not play any fixed weekend games (except where I missed it when signing up). I have adapted to what suits my style of playing, I think you all need to do the same. Because I don't play particular styles of play I do not call for the whole site to change to suit me, so please do not reply in kind.

Elsewhere Fencer has (recently) stated that this site offers many options ... use them if you want, or not.

And lastly a poignant offering ... I notice that two of the protagonists for doing away with autovacation still have their own autovacation set to on .... is this a double standard or just and oversight?

furbster: I've been wondering about that ever since, lol. I wonder what the details of the change are..

Fencer How come you didn't announce the Knight tournament allocation change in News? Seems to me it's the removal of a major restriction. Surely all Knights would welcome hearing that?

Yeh i don't think Fencer has updated the paid membership bit where it says you can only joing one tourney of the same type. Only reason i had an inkling it had changed was that i saw some subtle remark on one of teh discussion boards a week or two ago. At least you know now

emmett: Not sure if this is correct, try signing up for a tourney where u already have one running in. Eg. try joining anotehr loop chess tourney

Marfitalu: I do understand what tenuki is talking about, and I meant no disrespect for his opinions. There have been times when I have noted players who seemed to be manipulating the time rules. I find this more amusing than frustrating. As anyone who watches professional sports of any kind must realize, once a rule is adopted there is always the potential for it to be followed in a way that does not comport with what one supposes the intention of the rule to be.

As a lawyer, I am willing to argue to a court that a law is being applied in a way that thwarts its intention. In the USA, courts are often sypathetic to such arguments; in other countries, I believe courts tend to apply the laws as they are written and leave it to the rulemakers to change them if their intention is not being carried out.

Also as a lawyer, I know that any written rule is subject to being abused. Changing from one rule to another does not eliminate the potential for abuse, it simply changes the nature of that potential. As a game player, I tend to take a relaxed attitude towards this. Let those who find amusement in applying rules in ways they were never intended to be applied, do so; I can avoid those players when I recognize them.

And of course, let those who find amusement in arguing about what the rules should be, do so also!

alanback: So, you think that, even when there is a known bug who is used by...let call them not-very-sportmen-players, Automatic Vacations should be still in use and not wait until it to be fixed? Play at the pace you want, no problem, but PLAY! I understand you won´t like to do as a player (we all know who he is) who doesn´t make a single move during one month in 1300 games...are you defending him? I´m not attacking YOU...:-)

tenuki: I think we should allow one weekend day instead of two.

tenuki: Perhaps you are mistken about the site you are on. This site is as it is, and what it is is defined by its rules. One of those rules is the automatic vacation.

Can someone explain to me why it is so important for moves to be made within a particular time frame? I thought games were played for relaxation!

As for me, I come to the site, I make whatever moves are available, and I get on with the rest of my life.

If making moves constantly is very important to you, then I believe you are certainly playing on the wrong site; you should go to a site where games are played in real time.

Moreover, and I think this has been pointed out before, it is possible to create and play games here in which vacation days are not allowed. Anyone who is concerned about the use of vacation days should avoid games and tournaments that allow them.

Dear friends: I think we´re missing the point here...I wasn´t talking about those who use Automatic Vacations when you need it, but to prevent all those (non-)players who use it ONLY to annoy opponents, win undeserved games due to their opponents boredom, disrupt stairs functioning, and many crimes more...I think there should be a rule against them! not against decent players. Is it ok to have 1300 games and take advantage of a known bug to not make a SINGLE MOVE during one month???? If all those who defend the automatic vacation think it´s ok, then I think they are in the wrong site, maybe a chat site instead of a PLAYING site would be better for them.

Bry:Agree as well as but you forgot about the no days off rule.

Bry: Well I would hate to see a rule in place where if I'm between the choices of (1) Login on and getting a little caught up or (2) don't log on at all and get further behind - I would hate to see a rule which forces option 2 of people.

having said that, if something was put into place, I have plenty of other sites I can visit during those times - but would hate to be forced to do that.

Czuch Chuckers: Totally agree. A vacation day should only "kick" in when you have not been online that day....

I apprecite BBW's point..... but if you cannot guarantee to be on every day.... u shouldn't enter 1 day tournaments.....

Stevie: I agree 100%! If you can find time to come on this site you should not have the luxury of auto vacation. Maybe in BBWs example, he could just set a vacation for that day. But this is first and foremest a game playing site, and he should make his first priority making moves in a game, not checking messages. It gets infuriating when people start more games than they can keep up with, and they will be here for hours and only play on the discussion boards and fellowships when hey have games ready to time out. But I guess people can use their vacation days anyway they choose to, and we do have the option of only playing in games that dont allow vacations, so we wont have to worry about people like that!

Or reduce moving weekend days one time per month .

BIG BAD WOLF: We should have vacation days. Maybe we should get rid of weekend days, or reduce the weekend days to one day instead. Or we could count weekend days that are actually used against timeouts as a vacation day used...

Stevie: I would hate to see a restriction of not being able to use vacation days if someone is on-line. I know for example when I go on vacation to my sister-in-law's house, all they have is a VERY slow dial up connection available from their house - in which I get board there and do get on-line, and try to come here to check messages and such - but would almost be impossible for me to keep up with my games, hence a vacation day. if a restriction like that is put into place, it would stop me from even being able to check in and at least stay caught up with my messages.

Stevie: And why do you think they take such a hard work if they wouldn´t know they have unsporting advantage? They can win games and even tournaments witout knowing the game at all, just making their opponents leave the site in boredom (specially newcomers -Pawns, who have limited spots for games-) and drop their games.

I still reckon if someone has been online during a certain day, then later in the same day,, they should not be saved by auto vacation.. that is really annoying