hexkid: point of order- I don’t understand the benefits nor motive behind the original question… could you elaborate, assuming ‘invisible‘ = private;?]

rewritten Feature Request: "invisible" games should also be unlisted.
And I don't think I'll use that feature more than a few times every 30 years :)

Are you agreeing that private games be unrated so they can also be unlisted? A permanent change for all for your temporary experiment;?] Surely not!

BIG BAD WOLF & mctrivia::Private games are good for some things, but I think private games should be unrated also - if a player is going to be getting ratings from a game, then other players who compete for the same ratings should be able to see the games.

grenv::Battleboats has a winning strategy? I think you want them to be private to hide the fact that there is no winning strategy
[Obviously you haven’t found it;] LOL Battleboats 2 0 2 1652
mctrivia::grenv: there are meny strategys to battleboats but the bigest strategy is look up your oponents preivious games and try to find paterns. That is why he wants it.
Exactly! Thank you for making my point not only for battle boats but other games.

grenv::mctrivia: But who would be bothered trying to do that? Get a life people! Lol
Then why are you insisting for the abolition of private games;?] ROFLMAO!

nabla::Agreed, the problem is different with games of incomplete information like Battleboats. Nevertheless, in those games the best strategy is certainly not to play each game in the same way. It is rather the most boring strategy.
Actually it would be stupid;] but then you haven’t even played battleboats this year!
The problems I have with private games :
1) They are often used by the strongest players, so that nobody can learn from seeing their games…
Unless they actually play me- a learning experience for many;] or look at tournament games- probably a better indicator of their best strategies.
2) They can be used to hide cheating, either cheating by use of playing computers, either by pre-arranged games designed to manipulate the rating system….
I didn’t know, although I wasn’t surprised, that there were programs for backgammon until I saw them discussed openly here. Programs are why I rarely play chess. As far as manipulating the rating system, I’ve neither the time nor inclination.
The second option would not be valid if private games were always unrated as have been proposed, but the first one remains.
Of course Fencer can still see the private games, but when cheating occurs it is always the users who spot it in the first place.
Well, if private games were limited to unrated games of incomplete information (Battleboats, Dark Chess, ....) it would already be a good start.
Just because a game is unrated, doesn’t preclude cheating;] Fencer is more than welcome to inspect my games- I don’t use programs and did not know any opponents before I played them, much less collude with them.

grenv::Nonsense, this isn't poker and the analogy shouldn't be drawn. Poker is all about concealing your hand if not called, it's part of the game. Keeping chess games private is not. No more private games please
I can see where playing games in private to conceal your strategy is like poker. Keeping your cards ’close to your vest’ in order to protect not only strategy but your BKR until played. Whether ‘called’ by public or private invitation, or more importantly, until entering and playing in a tournament.

Nonsense is wanting to see someone’s hand without even being in the game.
Nonsense is demanding all games be public yet you wouldn’t look at them anyway.
Nonsense would be eliminating BK Ratings entirely in order to stop cheating.

Let’s just keep things the way they are- please keep the private games option.

[I apologise for the length- but proponents to keep private games unchanged are outnumbered]

Now about that ‘average hours per move wait’ option????;?]

nabla- et al: I think that grenv does not like the "feature" of setting a game private, and I fully agree with him.
Actually, I am hereby making a feature request for the abolition of private games

i disagree strongly-
some games like battleboats, you don't want to give away a winning strategy for nothing... for that matter, in any game.

you want to see my strategy? play me privately or in a tournament;]

diogenes: here? newbie doesn't know [and it looks like i won't for months;]LOL- but i tend to believe you...

diogenes: actually... it is [or should be], very similar to the way "Super Size HYPER Elimination---volume 1 (Hyper Backgammon)" was set up in the first round...
players are seeded as ranked... highest bkr to lowest- unrated [with unrated playing each other]
split the field in half with number one playing the best of the worst...
in the second round winners [unrated players are given provisional] are ranked above draws- split the field... etcetera... 'random' invites criticism... order begats order;]

GiuiT: Superb Solution! Fencer??????

'hours per move' per game type

Why not add this simple feature to-
"Waiting games" ?
or at least to-
"Finished games" in "Profiles" ?

i am new- so maybe this obvious request has been requested many times over the years- probably like an "auto pass" in backgammon or at least a pass choice where one has NO MOVE regardless of the roll... comments?

i'm so new- i don't even know if this link[;?] to my original unanswered request will work...;]

ps- grenv i'm not laughing...

this started as an innocent aside to the en passant rule

*BOB*on*Bush*: i won a $20 bet on the rule once- when i took a pawn en passant and was told i couldn't do it! i took the move back but we made the bet- left it at the bar and the next day i went to the library made a copy- went to bar and collected the $40;]

Marfitalu: Apparently you know the rules for Chess but not for the copyright.

you're dissing me- but i'm cool;]

*BOB*on*Bush*: pray tell- exactly what copyright rules did i break;?]

Marfitalu: Maybe the copy of the book ?

*BOB*on*Bush*: Maybe I didn’t copy the entire book-Maybe I copied ONE page [de minims copying (copying a small amount) is not copyright infringement;]
Maybe it was for educational purposes;]
Maybe I gave the author credit.
Maybe I didn’t publish it, nor call it my own creative work.
Maybe it was not creative work.
Maybe it was public domain!
Marfitalu: “Enpassant rule appeared at the begining of the Renaissance”

Maybe you don’t know what ‘exactly’ means.
exactly: In an exact manner; accurately.

You put yourself out as an authority on copyright infringement- while inferring I am ignorant…

So one more time- with emphasis- enlighten me!
pray tell- exactly what copyright rules did i break;?]

Marfitalu: Apparently you know the rules for Chess but not for the copyright.</>

pray tell- exactly what copyright rules did i break;?]

Daniel Snyder: i won a $20 bet on the rule once- when i took a pawn en passant and was told i couldn't do it! i took the move back but we made the bet- left it at the bar and the next day i went to the library made a copy- went to bar and collected the $40;]

while something is better than nothing... and the 'simple' formula would be to just take the total days/hours to complete a game and divide by the number of moves-

the math should take into account the time remaining for each player-

so in one case where my opponent took 19 days to make 3 moves... i am sure it took me < 4 days to accomplish the same...

however- rather than nothing- please do simple first! ;]

juls31: my slow players are the ones in the tournament i am in...

THAT won't change anytime soon! [Upgrade;]

...i am waiting for 3 players to finish they are all playing over 100 games.

i am new, and having been toasted, i choose my opponents more carefully, [although it would be a LOT faster with 'average WAIT per move']. have had many fast games with members playing about 2-400 games...;] good luck!

Marfitalu:Sorry but there is really nothing to see with the time limit
Exactly! if UNDER Time control in Waiting games- there were (average wait @ move)-

Everyone could *see* the big difference between some fast players at a 7 day control, and some slow players with a 1 day control...

The idea is to help players to find someone else who correspond more to play with.
Good idea! average wait per move would enable players to match-up speed wise.

regardless of action points- i'd like to see 'hours per move' in 'waiting games' and profiles... per game category-
[some games take longer- i suspect thinking games, like chess, have NO players vying for action points prizes, compared to the far less challenging games like ludo;]

although i'm still playing one of my original breakthrough games... started 2006/05/03, 01:18:47- the worst was paying 40 points [offered draw] to get out of a game that my opponent took 19 days to make 3 moves...
[lets see- 19 X 24 / 3....;]

hours- per move- per category
at least in profile....

then in waiting games where slow players suck in newbies who've played fast games with SOME members...

finally, maybe a filter option- for creating games and tournaments... [i'm in another i'm beginning to regret;]