Can't create game with specific side any more

@bububulin said in #143:

please try not to involve me in your fascist regime

You're involved in treating people fairly from now on. If you need to have a tantrum and call it fascist, you have my permission to do so.

@bububulin said in #143:

please try not to involve me in your fascist regime

Kid, all the site is saying is: "Hey, let's give people fair odds against each other here by default". Nobody is forcing you to play anything, just setting the rules for fair participation.

@bububulin said in #143:

please try not to involve me in your fascist regime

There is no play with black or we delete your account mandate is this update. You can do whatever you want, but you have to play the same rules as everyone else. That's hardly fascist

Many here forget,that we speak about a game!!! It should be a pleasure. And everyone should have the freedom to decide his opening. Dont forget: You need not play with him. Part of your freedom is to dicide this!!!

@funkloch said in #147:

Many here forget,that we speak about a game!!! It should be a pleasure. And everyone should have the freedom to decide his opening. Dont forget: You need not play with him. Part of your freedom is to dicide this!!!

Of course we know it is about a game, but you play the game against other people who need to be treated fairly. We can't use engines, and now we can abuse color.

We also can't start games with an extra queen, even though some kids may believe they have the right to one because they just prefer playing with an extra queen.

Being paired automatically with people mean that they should have a fair playing field. Lichess fixed the problem, it's to protect the 99% fair against the 1% predatory.

@funkloch said in #147:

Many here forget,that we speak about a game!!! It should be a pleasure. And everyone should have the freedom to decide his opening. Dont forget: You need not play with him. Part of your freedom is to dicide this!!!

It should be fun for everyone, not just the kids that want to play white all the time.

@connortheconman said in #138:

I hope the dams have been checked because this change is going to open up a floodgate of tears from kids crying "me no likey play black".

Funnier would be to have the algorithm steer their pairing towards equalizing their deficit now. Make them play all the games that they so self-servingly manipulated their way out of to teach them some manners.

Lol xD

@connortheconman said in #145:

Kid, all the site is saying is: "Hey, let's give people fair odds against each other here by default". Nobody is forcing you to play anything, just setting the rules for fair participation.

it's actually less freedom for everyone, wrongly perceived as progress.
Rather than more freedom for everyone, freedom of choice & freedom to decide whether to play a particular game or not.
Those would be there if color-chosen games weren't auto-matched.
Willing white players would play willing black players. Kindly notice that the mythical rank inflation would be even more minimal within such environment.
What we have now is many oppressing the few in the guise of worldwide justice plus addressing absurd cheating accusations.
As much as I'd love to, I'm not a kid anymore ;)

@bububulin said in #152:

it's actually less freedom for everyone, wrongly perceived as progress.
Rather than more freedom for everyone, freedom of choice & freedom to decide whether to play a particular game or not.
Those would be there if color-chosen games weren't auto-matched.
Willing white players would play willing black players. Kindly notice that the mythical rank inflation would be even more minimal within such environment.
What we have now is many oppressing the few in the guise of worldwide justice plus addressing absurd cheating accusations.
As much as I'd love to, I'm not a kid anymore ;)

It's progress, the right kind too. There are all kinds of freedoms taken away from us at this platform. I can't use stockfish during my games, I can't move my bishop from b2 to b3 when need to. I can't make two moves in a row to make my tactic work. I can't even call my opponents racist slurs when they refute my king sacrifice. Just because I'm not allowed to do these things, doesn't mean that that my liberty is being suppressed or that the platform has turned into a restrictive regime that is trying to break the human freedom. It means that, if I decide to use their free platform, which they pay to host, I may have to follow some of the rules they set.

They are in fact so much in favor about you having your liberty, that they allow you to take their entire platform for free, host it on your own server, and make any changes you like. The entire sourcecode for this site is free to take and tweak to your own liking, if you care to pay 100$/month in hosting to host it for the people that support your version of the site.

As for why they should not make the perfectly tweaked version of color picking for your liking, I think Thibault makes a good point in this article:

https://lichess.org/@/thibault/blog/we-dont-want-all-the-features/q3nOzv4n

Even if someone only plays white (or black), so what? yes, his rating will be +/- 22 rating points (=+/-3% chance more wins with white/ less wins with black).

His rating will not hurt anyone who plays him with black. The white-only players rating is reflecting his strength (with white), so if you beat him, you will get rewarded. You are not really at a disadvantage, the rating is correctly displayed. Only thing is, that the white player will be 22 rating points higher rated compared to if he played with both colours, but who really cares?
It doesnt distort the rating pool, like sandbagging does, or berserker mode.