Would it be tiresome to introduce a facility whereby it would be possible to search for any particular member's posts by page on a chosen board?

I agree that the letters for the "description" of the tournaments are too small..

Yes, all of this is planned. There is still an unused "Search" menu item :-)

In the tournements sometimes all games are ready except one or two less important games.Perhaps it would makes sense,that the tournement creator can start the next round if we have the winners of each group? Otherwise there is a long time until the next round begins and the most players perhaps have forgotten this tournement.:)

Great idea Caissus..

The only potential problem comes when the winner isn't totally obvious. I have run into tournaments where someone's score was lower than mine, but at the end when the "S-B" was figured out, they actually tied me. If the tournament creator didn't know how to figure out the "S-B", or did it incorrectly, that other person wouldn't have been included in the next round...
It probably doesn't happen very often, but it certainly does happen..

EDIT: In reading your post again, I'm now thinking I may have misunderstood what you were suggesting... so excuse me, if I'm totally off..

Actually if someone has a lower score, they should never go to the next round. The only time the S-B comes into play is when 2 (or more) players have the same score.

But to have a smarter game engine that could determine when the winner is first noticed would be nice, and also where the next rounds start automaticly without the tournament creator having to do anyting would also be good.

I think Rod03801 meant lower BKR but same score. Its happened to me too

Maybe you are right BBW. But I swear I'm remembering it correctly. I'm not saying the person with the lower score ended up winning the tournament, but tying it.. I COULD be remembering the situation all wrong, certainly..

I agree it would be nice if the program would be able to decide the winner earlier on, in the situations when the outcome of games still going on won't matter.

I had also been thinking about a feature where the creator can have an option when creating the tournatment, to have future rounds start automatically. (and the option to have it the way it is now..)

EDIT: I just went and looked at what the S-B exactly is.. And I see you are correct. I wonder what I was remembering....
I work at a nursing home, maybe it's affecting me.. LOL..

Yea, it would still be nice for the tournament creator to still have the option to start the next round. I know for one of my tournaments, Danochek was the winner and getting ready to move to the next round - which I was waiting on an answer from Fencer to know if the ban was perminate or just temporary, but never got an answer.... which I did not want to start it if he was going to be back. But actually now that I look, the other player has not been on since Nov 10th, so I guess I'll start the last round and just let the games time out. Since they are 2 games per player, it should end as a tie which I believe is fair! :-)

I'm not sure a Christmas amnesty won't be granted by Fencer for all those banned but there's no way of knowing. He may not have even thought about it. :)

I asked Fencer a while ago about the system automatically determining the winner of a section before all the games are complete (like it does on GoldToken, if any of you are familiar with that - it marks people as "eliminated" when they can no longer win, and marks player(s) as "winner" possibly even before all the games are complete, allowing future rounds to start with games from the previous round still in progress). Fencer said it was planned, but something like that would have to be tested heavily to ensure it works perfectly before he'd add it to the site, and that's the last i heard from him about it :-)

Hey... you... the mall is open, why don't you go buy that last minute gift for that last minute invisible child ?

(Don't you just love those off-topic foolies?...me neither!)

I suggest to change the way how discussion boards are moderated. The new messages should become visble to everybody only after group moderator approves them. This will protect us from spam messages like we see currently on Gothic Chess discussion board.

Monitoring the moderators should be higher priority.
Disappearing messages and provocations summon reactions.

A suggestion could be that there could be a few "global moderators" - which are able to edit/delete messages that may need it (and not have to wait for the main moderator or Fencer to get on to deal with it.)

At the same time, there should be someway to track what the global moderators do that way if there are problems, it can be tracked.

(For example - make a "bad stuff" board which can only be seen by Fencer, and whenever a moderator edits or deletes a message, it first gets copied to the "bad stuff" folder with the information of who deleted/edited which messages. That way, if a another moderator gets too big of a head, they can be tracked and delt with.

BBW: Lots of your proposed features are already planned :-)

Protection from cheaters is not planned yet, I see.
Guess you don't want to attract serious players. :-(

What is planned is planned and no complaints from non-paying members can change it.

surely won't change anything. :-(

that remark even contains a cheat - again.

else Filip would not be daring to leave his hideaway this year.

your visa at brainking are prolongued. :-(

the singing cheateres at the gothic board might feel disturbed else.

Join Brainking. Ah Blah.

Taurec, this is getting you no-where :o( You are directing your anger at the wrong person :o(

every honest player would be angry
at a webmaster harbouring cheaters while
stealing paid memberships and won games. :-(

deliberately that is.

I would agree.
Do you not think this is just making you lower to the level of cheaters though? I reckon best action would be to lay off Fencer because he has made the right decision about the "cheater", which being a pawn, you havent seen.
Then by doing this you will show you are adult and on a higher level, and you will get the respect you probably deserve :o)

you talking to yourself steve.. i see 10 messages to read.. get here and only 2!!! hhhmmmmm lol

Wouldnt be the first time would it Chatty LMAO

Sorry, I clicked on "hide" instead of "ban".

well we knew he is no man.

LMAO I do things like that in games Fencer, normally submit instead of undo LOL

please stop this buskvibes/taurec, it really is no fun for us to read.. and only causing more problems for yourself...

I have only problems with fiddlers and cheaters.
Enough thus cannot be worse here.

particulary blunt that remark about non-paying members.
almost gothic style after that thief embezzled the money.

Need we remind some it's Christmas

I reckon a way around some of the "wait till last minute move" and multi account posting. is a credit system. Move a certain amount of times before you earn a credit to allow reading or posting to boards. If you have no games, then no reading/posting at all. If all your games are waiting for opponents to move, then you can read and post to your hearts content .

;oÞ

I happen to know Fencer is always trying his best to help this site and the people who play here.
I'm sure he's quite aware of the various situations pending and that BK V.2 is going to be satisfactory for both the rich and poor :·)

We'll see....

          ~ MS

Hopefully! He did say it (and a few other things - i don't remember what exactly) should be done for the new year - he's got 9 days... :-)

Don't count on it :-) But when it's done, it's done.

Rofl! I'm sure we're all looking forward to it! (I know I am!!)

:-)

Maybe we should give him 10 days... it is the holiday season! :-)

You think we should be that generous BBW? :-)

I believe that I have enough data to prove to myself that draws have no effect on ratings.

Fencer, could you please share with us the formula used to calculate ratings? Also is there a way I could perhaps play a test game with you or anyone else to prove there is a bug in the ratings system?

Just trying to help by the way.

my drop of 60 was enough proof to me that they drop or something wrong. I watched bkr deliberately to see what happens

I've finished two games as draws yesterday, both of them affected my BKR. The formula is still the same, here.
But it is also related to the new database model, currently under development.

Ok I looked at that page and now my head hurts :)

me too @*_*@
LOL

Well I can't for the life of me work out why none of my drawn games does anything to my rating. I guess it's possible there's something wrong with some people's and not others?

Anyway as a paying member I'd like to be convinced. Is it possible to do a query of the database for historical ratings to see how individual games affected the rating.

If not I am about to conduct a test. I am rated 2141 at Atomic chess. I will challenge a friend of mine who has never played before and we will agree to a draw after several moves.

Before we do that could you let me know what you think my expected rating would be after the game.

I contend that it will still be 2141, but am prepared to be proved wrong.

here is the game