Jules: ow that we can kill vacation days, that will work too!

playBunny: I like the quick players club. But mabe we could make it a fellowship? his way we can make/play tournaments with only peoiple from that fellowship, and it is easier than the wa it is set now.

Partica: LOL :)

Partica: LOL OMG where did that come from And dont you mean redneck english?

pauloaguia: ah, now I see.... that is czech time as well, is it not?

Hrqls: Ah... I see your pint. If you use an auto vacation on any game, then no game should ever time out during the next 24 hours. That makes sense!

Hrqls: The way I read it you are going to lose a whole day for each hour turn you miss. The auto vacation is not going to give you 24 hours it is only going to help you once for each incident. Thats why I suggest we get 720 hours of vacation instead of 30 days.

BIG BAD WOLF: The way I read it, you will lose a whole vacation day for every hour that you miss. Maybe we could have it changed from vacation days to vacation hours instead?


In regards to my other queery.... I know those options exist, but it would be nice to browse the games waiting list or tournaments list and only see games that we are willing to participate in. Sop in my example I would not se any games listed that use the standard weekend days only :)

With the new time features available, I have a couple of ideas..... Maybe an option we could check so we dont accidently play in certain time limit games?

Example: My weekends are on mondays and tuesdays. I dont want to play in any games where only the normal saturday/sunday weekend is allowed. Maybe I could have an option that wont let me accept any games like this? Or an option where I dont even see any of the games or tournaments which are set up this way?

Andersp: Finally, something we can agree on! All we can do now is pray... (and wonder if Bush is behind the whole thing)

grenv: What is a perpetual draw mode anyway?

I have never seen a way to make a draw offer last more than one turn...

This is a nice addition to pond games, but it doesnt take you to the next most important gamer to play, time wise! I think it should be set up to take you to the next game that is due to time out first. (I think now it takes you to the game that was started the longest ago) Or maybe even expand the options to resemble regular (non multi player type) games, where there are many options on which game to go to next?

Andersp: Not quite my point....

I suggest we all pray...

Andersp: That would be possible if we were all aldults. But, as you know, this is a G rated site and there are many unsupervised juveniles here who are incapeable of "moderating" themselves from you or I, therefore it is our responsibility and the responsibility of the moderators to make these discussion boards as sanitized as necessary to keep from corrupting the weakest among us.

Some great points Walter.... unfortunatly the post is off topic and it is a banable offense to write about moderators or issues about moderating on a public board. (thats wha I have been told anyway)

Your post has been removed and you have been banned for 24 hours, then hidden for 24 more hours, then I will have my eye on you and jump an anything you post over the next 6 months.....

grenv: Thats prolly correct.... someone like BBW has had problems mainly because he plays way too mamny games and ends up not playing very fast in most of them, and people wonder why he is not making his turns, and they see him at this fellowship, and that discussion board etc, doing lots of things but making turns, and they ask him to turn his attention to his games instead of the discussion boards and he doesnt like people to know that he is here so much, yet not spending much time playing games..... This is just my opinion and is just a example to make a point, not meant to be an exact representation.

The point is that most people who use the cloak mode do have something to hide , and most of the time it is something like the scenario I described above.

I think anyone using the cloak mode option should have the privilege to see what others are doing removed!

Walter Montego: That sounds well thought out... hadnt really given it the kind of thought you did. I just noticed that a good chess player for example could have a high average bkr for 11 or more games without having to play anything but chess. Since I am not really a chess player, I have no idea how similar or different each variation is or isnt. I do know that a god 5 in line player will also be good at swap 5 in line and pro 5 in line. I dont know how others feel about other games? Is it likely that a good reversi 8x8 player will also be good at 6x6, for example? I dont know.

I was not saying I had all the answres, I am just looking for a better way to determine a good overall "gamer" than what we currently have listed in the statistics. (although someone like CaoZ, who is currently at the top of the list, would probably still be there with any new system as he has quite a high ranking in quite a variety of different games)

Maybe as well as having 11 different games you could also require say 8 (just an example) different game types, that way somebody who only plays chess and variants, for example, would not be included on the list.

On a side note, I think it is mostly chess players who skew these results as there are so many variants of chess that you can make the list without knowing any other game types. This is not the same for a line game player or reversi game player as they have to be good at someother game type other than their "main" game because there just arent 11 different game variants for those games.

BuilderQ: I guess I was misunderstood what I meant... I dont mind using variants, I am just looking for a way to find out who truely is the most versital gamer on site. I dont think being good at 5 in line and pro 5 in line and swap 5 in line and dark 5 in line, and never playing any other games besides 5 in line, makes you anything but a good 5 in line player. am looking for a good "all around" player. Someone who can play, for example, chess and battleboats and reversi and checkers and spiderline 4 etc...

I think the attempt in adding a statistic for average bkr for 11 games or more was to give a list of players who are good at multiple types of games, but as it is it falls short and is misleading (at times) I am only asking for something that gives us a more broad example of a good overall "gamer".

I was just scanning the statistics page. i noticed how misleading the column for average bkr for 11 or more games is. It seems like it would give a good representation of who is really good at all different kinds of games..... then I noticed someone like Caissus who is only really good at chess and its variations, no other game types at all. Chess, corner chess, dark chess, this chess, and that chess.
I would like to see a similar list but not use all of the game variations, to maybe get a representative of who is good at different kinds of ghames. I mean who is going to be good at 5 in line and not be good at pro 5 in line, for example?
How about a list that only includes different games without their variations? It would give us an idea who the true "gamers" are on this site!

nobleheart: The age designation has also been brought up before and denied as it would inform perverts to who are the minors to harrass...

good idea

OK, you got it...

Eriisa: OMG! You had my blood boiling there for half a second!!!!! You got me that time! Good one :)

Summertop: I too would like to see the creation of another public board that could handle topics when moderators from another board have determined that a topic that once was relevant has moved beyond the relevance for that board. My personal experience has tought me that you can get pushed from board to board by moderators who want your discussion anywhere but in their backyard, and who ultimatly accuse you of spamming all the boards because you keep moving the topic at their suggestion. Most often the "final" call is to ask you to go to debate fellowship or boiler room or wherever. But I dont think that sending public board discussions to a fellowship is the correct solution at all! Maybe what we need is a public debate board? I mean it makes no sense to have most of a conversation on a public board with public access and then require that conversation to continue to some private fellowship with its limited and exclusive memberships. Just doesnt make any sense!

Also, Partiqa, I think you can put me on your enemies list and I can still "track" you through my friends list.

So from what I am reading... if I have someone on my enemies they cannot see or accept any of my waiting games?

When I remove someone from a game or I invite them to my fellowship, it would be great to be a able to communicate with them in regards to these actions.

Fencer: ...He said in his best British accent....

grenv: Thats right, we dont need to buy virus software.... And no mouseover problems with emoticons either ;)

ScarletRose: The virus thing is a big one, one huge hastle I dont have to deal with, also pop ups, and as Purple mentioned, I am viewing on a large screen tv from the comfort of my couch using wireless remote and key board, we are not stuck at a desk in an uncomfortable chair squinting at a 17 inch monitor, while roilling around a little mouse.

Also can your computer record tv shows for you or tell you all the shows on tv with such and such an actor in them or all of the shows related to football or any number of television viewing features? Did your computer cost you $100?

There are many advantages that a webtv has over a computer.

Speed is not one of them...

grenv: I think you would be surprised. I bet at least 10% of the members here are on webtv.
Still a minority, and it still makes sense to have java script on as the default. I have seen web sites where you can check that you are using webtv and it automatically makes your settings optimal for that browser.

grenv: Javascrpt doesnt work on webtv, that is one reason to have it disabled.

that game looks fun!

Chalk one up for webtv!
No pop up problems here :)

BIG BAD WOLF: ....or simply only allow a tournament for one game at a time. Since there is no way to include all games into one tournament anyway.

Most of the time when someone sets up tournaments for 'all games' most of them do not even get the required participation to begin anyway.

I know it 'saves space' on the tournament listing page. But if it is a new tournament, then what the heck, make people put them up seperatly.

Fencer: Sorry, I was not looking for an explaination. I was just venting.

I just think that if the limit is 2 now, and many people honored that even before the rule was implimented thinking they would lose them anyway, why let anyone keep more than 2 now?

Vikings: Thats correct.
But nobody was told that they could keep any fellowships already existing. It sounded like we would lose any of them over the limit of two. Some people already gave some away, unecessarily, and some (like myself) did not start another one because we did not want to go through the hasstle of getting it going only to have it taken away. Had we known that we could have been grandfathered, these actions would not have been necessary.

Walter Montego: I hear you...

I had a couple of fellowships I wanted to start recently, and didnt because I knew Fencer was going to limit them son, and didnt want to waste the time just to get it taken away. I know other people gave away fellowships before the change because they wanted to start a new one but didnt want to go over the limit of 2.

I think that anyone with a rook membership created before the rule change should continue with the same benefits that we signed up with. We should all be grand fathered, and impliment the rule for new and renewed memberships from this point on.

Either that or only allow 2 for everybody regardless.

When you pay, you sign up for all the available options, and they shouldnt be taken away during that membership period.

LOL, correct, no more feature, unless you pay....

But many are fed up with bug cafe scrabble right now because they made the descrambler feature only available to paying members.....

maybe an apology to the owners of all the sites you did just offend? They have feelings too you know, and even though they arent directly affected by your comments, they would be adversly affected if they did read them, and I am personally saddened myself :)

Its just not nice to put down anyone, especially behind their back, or where they cannot respond. Even if it is the truth!

Hmmmm.... have we always had all those DB's?
I dont remember seeing many of them before?

round the pond?

How come there are not public DB's for all games supported by Brainking?

Just a technicality..... But, there is no way to time out in this game. It is set up that you have a default guess no matter what. So, you technically have 2 days to "change" your guess, and by not optioning to make a change, your default guess is always used. On the first turn, you default guess is 0, after the first turn it is whatever your previous guess was.

Since you can only place a message when you make a move, there is one way to tell who has made a move. Although there is no requirement to write a message with your move, so it doesnt show everyone who has made a move.