Right now, in correspondence, you get a set amount of days per move. My suggestion is to add another option called a "time bank". For example, if the time control is 1 day with 10 days of time bank, you would get 1 day per move but if 24 hours have passed and you didn't make a move, lichess would start counting down from your time bank. Once you make a move, the time bank clock stops running and you get back the usual 1 day per move. Obviously if you have no more time in your time bank then it's a loss.
Alternatively, in event of emergency allow both players agree to pause the clock for X days.
Sounds cool.
Seriously. I had a baby and timed out about 15 correspondence games as a result. Others, I snuck in a quick, sleep-deprived move now and then just in time, only to blunder. Similar situations have arisen a few times in the intervening months since my son's birth (he was constipated for a week; that may sound almost funny to a third party, but it's a nightmare for parents when the child won't sleep and gets hysterical whenever he feels an urge to BM!). I don't really care about the rating points, but I always feel very guilty if I time out in correspondence.
A time bank would be very convenient in many cases, that's for sure.
It would, however, also be very inconvienent in other cases. Namely, if the opponent justs quits for good. Then one has to wait for 10 (or whatever is set) additional days to finally win that game. And potentially delay starting another game for that period, if you aim to only have a maximum number of correspondence games open at the same time (specifically to avoid these situations where it becomes too much of a burden. Side note: If you expect a baby, you should probably not have 15+ games open at the day of the birth. Don't tell me all of them were going on for more than 9 months).
A "we both agree to temporarily stop the clock" button would be much better, imo. After all, physical chess clocks have the same feature as well, and I haven't heard anyone to be bothered by that. There may of course be some additional precautions needed to avoid abuse (e.g. once the clock is stopped, one player can't just turn it back on before the other is back).
It would, however, also be very inconvienent in other cases. Namely, if the opponent justs quits for good. Then one has to wait for 10 (or whatever is set) additional days to finally win that game. And potentially delay starting another game for that period, if you aim to only have a maximum number of correspondence games open at the same time (specifically to avoid these situations where it becomes too much of a burden. Side note: If you expect a baby, you should probably not have 15+ games open at the day of the birth. Don't tell me all of them were going on for more than 9 months).
A "we both agree to temporarily stop the clock" button would be much better, imo. After all, physical chess clocks have the same feature as well, and I haven't heard anyone to be bothered by that. There may of course be some additional precautions needed to avoid abuse (e.g. once the clock is stopped, one player can't just turn it back on before the other is back).
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.