tonyh: And how would you explain that to users who really don't like this feature?

Fencer: Nobody is forced to use it.

And an opponent using it is indistinguishable from a quick player, so that shouldn't matter. (with the possible exception to fisher clock games)

Luke Skywalker: "Nobody is forced to use it" and "without getting agreement from both players" is a contradiction.

Fencer: It's not a contradiction.
It seems to me you implemented AutoPass as a game setting. The game either uses AutoPass or it doesn't.
For us that are arguing for the "without aggreement from both players", we see this setting as 2 settings for each game - white is using AutoPass / Black is using AutoPass.

I don't need to know if my opponent is using AutoPass or not - the only way I'll probably know is if I play and the game comes right back to me (and even that depends on how I sort my games). This in no way affect my play (well, actually it does - I do all my moves at once until the games reaches a state where my opponent can make a move on his/her own - making it last longer on those moments where we are really playing and not just throwing the game back at each other).

With the dual setting, I'm not forced to use AutoPass and my opponent can. Is this one setting / dual setting issue related to your problem with the "without aggreement" thing?

Fencer: More of my oppinion on this: most of the objections against using AutoPass only apply to me using autopass, not my opponent. Let's see:

- If I use AutoPass, when the game comes back to me it may look very different. True. But if my opponent is suing autopass and I'm not, I'll always see the game as it was the last time I played (because my opponent passed and didn't change anything).

- It may disrupt the conversation the current system as it implemented already prevents autopass from kicking in if a message is sent with the move

- The dice must be rolled automatically before the move to know if it's a pass or not and I don't trust nobody to roll my dice but me, not even a computer. Well, my opponent's dice will be rolled if he's using autopass. If I don't want mine to be rolled I just decide not to. Is it really an issue if my opponent's dice are rolled by anyone else than him?

- I want to try and see if my opponent times out while it's his turn Well, if you play all your moves in a row your opponent won't have much more time than he/she already had. And this is a rather selfish and not sporting argument anyway. (Fischer clock settings may require a different analisys because of the impact of the bonus - but most posts I've read on this issue aggree that Fischer Clock can be taken care of at a later time).

- I don't want my opponent to use AutoPass because I want him/her to suffer, having to click the pass button all those times in a row Well, ok, this is an argument in favour of requiring autopass to be aggreed by both players, yes.


I hope I didn't forget any of them. Anybody, feel free to join more arguments to this list (for or against).

pauloaguia: I have a few comments on those arguments

If I use AutoPass, when the game comes back to me it may look very different.

Well then don't use autopass. I think if a player picks to use autopass, they should already know it may not look the same.

It may disrupt the conversation

I think the system should still work even if the opponenet writes something.

For example (NO AUTOPASS), if my opponenet makes a move and writes something - when I log in at 5pm, I will see the message

For example (WITH AUTOPASS), if my opponenet makes a move and writes something - the game comes back to them 5 times since I had to pass 5 times. I think STILL log in at 5pm (The exact same time), and will see the message. (YES - The message is seen at the exact same time, but now the game is 5 moves further then it would have been! Plus been told this is a game site, not a chat site.)


WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE:

If one person wants autopass, let it autopass just on his turn. (The opponenet who chooses to not use autopass can still play out every move.)

Let is work on Fischer Clock Games - The majority of players who play Fischer Clock Games are looking for faster games - so why not let Autopass speed it up also?

Let Autopass still work if there is an in-game message. When an autopass is taken, just include a little note of "Your opponenet had no moves and choose to autopass until they have a move. They will make a move & see any message once they have a move to make." Like I said above, i will still see the note at the same time - just the game can be further along. If the note was about a pass move, then I can just go back and look at it - and reply if needed.

BIG BAD WOLF: I put those comments because they were the ones used when the autopass discussion came to be. But then I analyzed them under the situation where I decide not to use autopass but my opponent does use it (assuming a situation where one-side autopass would be implemented).

If one person wants autopass, let it autopass just on his turn. (The opponenet who chooses to not use autopass can still play out every move.) That's precisley what's being discusse here :)

About the messages, I can live with the game coming to me if there's a message. I can live with the message (or a reply to my messages) coming to me only a few moves after it was sent. But since this is one of Fencer's main arguments, I'm not going to start a fight over it now. First I'd like to see one-side autopass implemented

As to the Fischer clock games - these players are looking for faster games, yes, but the bonus may start packing up without you being online. For instance, with a 1 day bonus, a sequence of 10 autopasses would almost instantly add 10 days to that player's time. If he's online, fine, that time would have been added anyway (minus the minutes it took for him to actually pass on his own). Now, I think this can be seen as a sort of autovacation - force yourself into a pass situation and start building up on the bonus (mind you, on same games, passing is not a bad thing, it may even be an advantage).
My personal opinion in this case is that it doesn't matter as well and I wouldn't mind playing a Fischer clock game with my opponent using autopass. Winning on timeout is not a good thing - I think wanting to do so reveals bad sportsmanship - but it's usually a substancial part of the contract when using it, especially with the shorter time settings, where some seconds can make a difference.

pauloaguia: I've yet to see anyone stating they don't want their opponent to use autopass in a Fisher game because they want to win by time-out, but suppose there's a vast silent group of players wanting to win their games this way. I have the following suggestions:

• In a Fisher game, an autopassed move doesn't add any time to the clock of the player who autopasses.
  
• Autopassed moves are queued until the autopassing player comes unline. Only then are the autopassed moves played. Heck, there could even be a big red button on the main page saying "PRESS HERE TO PLAY ALL YOUR AUTOPASSED MOVES". Disadvantage is that the opponent of the autopassing player still has to wait.
  </ul>
  
  Anyway, starting today, I will not play a pass until I've less than 24 hours left on my clock.

AbigailII: Ya the problem his autopass and automove have to main advantages.

Player: You do not have to play on games were you are in pass position or in the case of auto move were you have no choice in the mater really helps if you have a lot of games.

Oponent: Oponent does not need for you to come back online to make next move. With auto move this can be a real advantage in games like antichess were you can force a player into move after move of forced moves.

mctrivia : 3)
pauloaguia: I can't agree more with all you said.
I just don't even understand the argument about rolling the dices. Do people really believe that they are physically rolling the dices when clicking on "Roll dice" ? We all know that it is just some random number generator kicking off.

nabla: I never understood it either. But there's has been quite a fuss about it in the past, I'm sure about that part. Maybe some people think they can control what dice come out if they throw them in a particular instant in time (after all, many pseudo-random-generators are time based, maybe that's it). And I think someone reminded that situation once, when we were discussing if autopass was feasible in the past, so I added it to my list.

Anyway, even if that argument had some substance (which I don't think it has, but what the heck), I still don't think it's an argument good enough to force your opponent NOT TO have autopass.