Can't create game with specific side any more

separate lobby would not be needed. And the quick pairings with certain time controls - in the lobby I see mostly seeks for non-standard-time controls. I dont expect the lobby becoming overloaded with white seeks. However, if so, the queue idea could be good, ideally with a clock and a message what the average waiting time currently is. This would be a bit more code to do, but it wouldnt be rocket-science. Not as hard as programming completely new, like horde chess, or all those variants.
Adding 20 more lines of code isnt that much of a burden, and its not that complicated issue.

But who does it?

@chessname1234 said in #451:

Horrible change to no longer allow people to choose color. I have been a member since 2015 and have played over 86,000 games but will no longer contribute to a site that limits choices. Opened up a Chess.com account this morning.

I think about doing the same. I am so sad, before the change I loved Lichess so much.

@Munich said in #461:

separate lobby would not be needed. And the quick pairings with certain time controls - in the lobby I see mostly seeks for non-standard-time controls. I dont expect the lobby becoming overloaded with white seeks. However, if so, the queue idea could be good, ideally with a clock and a message what the average waiting time currently is. This would be a bit more code to do, but it wouldnt be rocket-science. Not as hard as programming completely new, like horde chess, or all those variants.
Adding 20 more lines of code isnt that much of a burden, and its not that complicated issue.
But who does it?

If you really think it's 20 lines of code, I would be excited to see you push that change !

@LucreziaBorgia said in #464:

Whyyy do I get nooooo game in the Lobby?
It is not possible to play today.

Not a single game?

Looks like you have a ban for violating the Lichess Terms of Service. I believe pairing is done very different or those accounts

@NotTakenUsername said in #466:

It's not a solution. If that's your main account as you claim, you hardly play any games so obviously you wouldn't know how it's not a solution.

Sure I do, I have invited people to play.

One mistake doesn't take anything away from what the developers of Lichess have done for this site, it's a great site. On the same note, previous good work does not excuse any mistakes that have been made. A mistake is a mistake and should be pointed out. Calling this change lazy is not a mischaracterization, I have not been provided with a strong argument in favor of removing the color option for casual games.

It's not lazy, nor a mistake. It's a FairPlay upgrade. Just because they haven't contacted you to explain their reasons behind the side-wide enforcement of fairness, does not make them lazy in their programming. If they would be lazy, this site would not exist.
All you have been doing is opening up your laptop, call Lichess lazy, and did nothing but type some forum message to contribute to the change you think would be beneficial to all. You could've picked up the development ticket instead, but choose not to. That's lazy

No idea, but it's too obvious this is not your main account. Super fresh account, less than 100 games and a good 1/4 of the comments on this thread are yours. Now tell me, would somebody who just made an account on this site be so active on the forums and so eager to assert that a downgrade is actually beneficial? It doesn't make any sense.

It's a major upgrade in favour of fairness, and it's obvious why it's beneficial to have a fair site. Even if I only played 5 games, this would be obvious. You don't need to play thousands of games in order to be in favour of fairness improvements. I don't think it's obvious at all that it means I would have a years old account to be in favour of this. In fact, it seems that the only people who are harshly against this improvement, are the ones that have abused it for years.

Then again, I believe yesterday I was accused of having your account as my main one - so this might just be a conversation with myself

@BeDecentForAChange said in #467:

Sure I do, I have invited people to play.

I'm sure you invite random people and those random people accept random challenges, sounds plausible.

It's not lazy, nor a mistake. It's a FairPlay upgrade. Just because they haven't contacted you to explain their reasons behind the side-wide enforcement of fairness, does not make them lazy in their programming. If they would be lazy, this site would not exist.

It is a lazy mistake and the proof is that the competitor site has retained this feature and it works just fine. Objectively speaking, this was a downgrade.

All you have been doing is opening up your laptop, call Lichess lazy, and did nothing but type some forum message to contribute to the change you think would be beneficial to all. You could've picked up the development ticket instead, but choose not to. That's lazy

Imagine if I had to contribute to every means of entertainment I used in order to criticize it.

It's a major upgrade in favour of fairness, and it's obvious why it's beneficial to have a fair site. Even if I only played 5 games, this would be obvious. You don't need to play thousands of games in order to be in favour of fairness improvements. I don't think it's obvious at all that it means I would have a years old account to be in favour of this. In fact, it seems that the only people who are harshly against this improvement, are the ones that have abused it for years.

It has nothing to do with fairness when it comes to casual games. Also, I'm against this 'improvement,' but I don't think I've ever abused this feature. Those who abuse it must be rare enough that it is hardly noticeable when pairing for games.

"Those who abuse it must be rare enough that it is hardly noticeable when pairing for games."

My mum (83), rated around 900 "abused" it, but I would not call her abuser for playing only with the white pieces.
I can quite well understand her desire to only play white. First, she is used to this, and second, she doesnt know black openings from her side, she only plays against them with white. for her its irritating, and not the game she loves, if she suddenly plays with black.

Can you blame her? Or even tell her she is abusing lichess? She isnt a fair player?
I mean, that really goes too far in a liberal society. Chess is a game, and supposed to be fun. C'mon!

It feels like racism to talk of such players as "abusers" and "unfair players" etc.
Is there an expression if you opress and demonize a minority such as white-only-players?

@Sofia-Mary said in #468:

Yesterday and another day before he talked to me with different profile names here to one communication part. He deleted it quickly, but I have pictures.

Something already told me we're dealing with a creep
He seems quite harmless but on a safe side let's better not provoke him ;]

@NotTakenUsername said in #469:

I'm sure you invite random people and those random people accept random challenges, sounds plausible.

Everybody I play here is a random person to me. And yes, I've invited people here and played them.

It is a lazy mistake and the proof is that the competitor site has retained this feature and it works just fine. Objectively speaking, this was a downgrade.

It was a well thought out commit designed to improve the fairness on this site. Objectively, it has been the best thing the site has done so far to ensure everybody is treated fairly.

Imagine if I had to contribute to every means of entertainment I used in order to criticize it.

You don't have to. But calling people lazy for not making something happen in their free time, not getting paid, that you personally want and you could do yourself is in fact lazy.

It has nothing to do with fairness when it comes to casual games. Also, I'm against this 'improvement,' but I don't think I've ever abused this feature. Those who abuse it must be rare enough that it is hardly noticeable when pairing for games.

Sure it does. Using a chess engine in casual games is just as unfair as it is in rated games. Just because you're not playing a rated game doesn't mean you should forced to play the color that your opponent sets for you.