grenv: .
.
.
This is bloody ridiculous behaviour.

This is not bloody ridiculous behaviour since this is inside Brainking's legal rules....
Also i should say to your suggestion of "I request that these silly time limits where I end up with 3 hours to make a move don't time out while I'm asleep." that again:
If you don't like this time control don't choose games or tournaments with it!

I should note that i agree with you 100% that this time controls are somewhat ridiculous and they don't even let you sleep if you don't want to lose, but since we have the choice of playing or not then i don't see any problem.....

[Edited: "I should note" instead of the stupid "i should not"]

Fencer: .
.
.
Does anybody knows the line that divides to legal and not legal(due to Scrabble licence) two Scrabble variations....?
I mean how many modificitions does someone has to make to the default Scrabble in order this to be different from a point of view that no one can sue you.....?
Is a small change enough, does it have to be 3 major changes, etc, and generally when the violation of the licence stops? Is the quantity of
changes that matters is the ......what?

CRY ME A RIVER: .
.
.
pauloaguia: IT IS OUR RIGHT TO DO SO

Yes of course! I'm with you! I heavily compain to Fencer that allows unrated players to play games versus rated players!!!!!!!
Fencer you should put an end to this! Don't ever allow unrated players to play with rated ones. Even if both sides want this..... Consider this as a feature request by me. It's my right to ask this....
Also another very useful thing would be if unrated players would not be able to play at Mondays! It's my right to ask this and as a paying member i do....


Also a tip to CRY ME A RIVER and Summertop:
If you don't want to play with an unrated player you have the option to do it and don't play.....
If you want to play with an unrated player you have the option to do it and play.....

Fencer: .
.
.
Well OK.... Although i still insist that i don't think that Rooks would die if Pawns couldn't see their posted smileys immediately(i say immediately since Pawns could see the smileys simply going into this page and replacing instead of X the number of the smile---> http://brainking.com/images/smileys/X.gif)

Anyway it's your choice and although i don't agree i don't find it bad since Pawns always have the chance of migrating to the 1st and 8th row area....

Also it is always nice to show your superiority to Pawns by showing them a couple of smileys that they can only see but can't post!


2 questions: Can Pawns see the latest html code you added? Can Pawns see pictures of the persons in the discussion boards?

KotDB: Still, I find this change confusing. Yesterday, seeing smileys was a privilege reserved for paying members. Today, not seeing smileys is a privilege reserved for paying members. Why? This change affects only pawns, yet it was implemented suddenly at the request of a handful of rooks.

Yes that's odd! That's really odd!
If the change has been suggested by Rooks as you say i find it somewhat ridiculous.... Why Rooks should care about what Pawns can see or not? It's simply none of their(our) business what Pawns should see or not.....
AND the only logical reason i can think of for what happened(Rooks requested that feature), is some Pawns to have requested from some of their Rook friends to say on this board this request because as Rooks will get more attention....



Fencer: I've just followed a request of paying members which is, of course, more important than a complaint of non-paying members.

Yes but don't you find it odd that Rooks request a feature that doesn't affect them at all but only affects Pawns?
For example if i and 8-9 more Rooks ask as a request that Pawns should see their page with negative colors then you should do it?
OK you would say this is not a logical request, but what i'm trying to say is that every request of a Rook that affects ONLY Pawns and not them is not logical! And can be explained only by a Pawn's intervention to the Rook to make the request since he will receive more attention....

Bopop: .
.
.
??????????????
Why you put so many spaces???????

I don't really thing that was the case....Ed Trice Vs (Fencer and others) was the problem.....
Too bad....
Peace comes when war destroys everything! In our case peace came before war destroys anything....
But i liked those flaming days....

No need to apologize at all.....You can accuse whoever you want actually. And me of course.... And while with others there will probably some fights be generated, with me things are different I'm never insulted or feel offended....!
But since you said that you weren't refering to anyone in particular things are even simplier....

And to make it ON topic i vote to bring Gothic Chess here. Seems an interesting variant!
    Ouch, ouch, ouch!

Well i thought you were refering to me since I proposed the variant and you said someone HERE, so with here i thought you mean in this discussion board the one that participates in the conversation....

Speaking about Backgammon variants:
One of the most interesting for me(except Backgammon and Fevga) is Domino-Backgammon or whatever they call it.
What is this? A VERY interesting Backgammon variant where thinking carefully is necessary while it is very fun too....!

How is played: Instead of a dice you have 36 dominoes. Each domino has the numbers of every possible combination of 2 dice, that is 11,12,13,...65,66.
At the start of the game a dice is being used to determine the player who will play first.

But then we forget dice and use a domino to determine our move. The first player picks one domino of his choise(not random) for example 45(a better variant in my opinion is the one that doesn't allow a double choice at the beginning of the game) and plays 45 but he should have in his mind that the other player could pick whatever he wants! The dominoes that has been used can't be used again for that player, until we run out of dominoes(that means we played all our 36). Then the game continues with again having a new set of 36 dominoes from 11,12....to....66.

Andersp: Fencer: I can still not understand how you could say yes to that silly cloakfeature and NO to autopass

I can add that i still don't understand how Fencer could say yes to that silly cloakfeature and NO to autopass.

Good things have to be repeated or repetition is the mother of wisdom....

grenv:

alanback: No need to do anything else. Just ignore him!
Well i actually don't follow my advice and have a "conversation" with him, and i lead him into more madness. When he asks why i agree with Trice(a name that makes him mad) i respond because Trice is a nice guy etc... When he asks if i'm using a computer i respond that yes around 10 different! When he says something accusing me i respond that he is right. That makes him unbelievably more mad and angry! I stay calm as always and enjoy this very much.....

657: Do you say that Pawns are not as clever as the paying members.......? I agree!
If they were clever they would buy a membership......

WhiteTower: Perfect idea! It doesn't matter if the time schedule will be furlilled as long as the time will not be totally wrong.......