Can't create game with specific side any more

70 pages of complaints and guess what ............. lichess couldnt care less.

What's there to 'care' about? There are a handful of people complaining, a good part of those were the very reason this update was necessary. They cared enough for the players on the site to write the code to fix the abuse. Just move on, on to the next feature

@AndrewWilis said in #690: > 70 pages of complaints and guess what ............. lichess couldnt care less. What's there to 'care' about? There are a handful of people complaining, a good part of those were the very reason this update was necessary. They cared enough for the players on the site to write the code to fix the abuse. Just move on, on to the next feature

AndrewWilis

#692

@BeDecentForAChange said in #691:

What's there to 'care' about? There are a handful of people complaining, a good part of those were the very reason this update was necessary. They cared enough for the players on the site to write the code to fix the abuse. Just move on, on to the next feature

There was and is no need to change a good system. And 70 pages is a LOT. So yes, there is something to care about, but no one cares.
What "abuse" was there to fix?
ALL my games in the lobby i played BLACK since i wanted to improve my defence system.
So if players do the same with white, suddenly they are abusers.
Is there any written rule in lichess that allows you to call your fellow pkayers abusers?
Dont think so.
So next time you call someone an abuser, think twice.
I ask lichess to reinstate the feature of chosing color at least for the lobby.
Opponents have the free choise to accept the offered color or just pick another.

@BeDecentForAChange said in #691: > What's there to 'care' about? There are a handful of people complaining, a good part of those were the very reason this update was necessary. They cared enough for the players on the site to write the code to fix the abuse. Just move on, on to the next feature There was and is no need to change a good system. And 70 pages is a LOT. So yes, there is something to care about, but no one cares. What "abuse" was there to fix? ALL my games in the lobby i played BLACK since i wanted to improve my defence system. So if players do the same with white, suddenly they are abusers. Is there any written rule in lichess that allows you to call your fellow pkayers abusers? Dont think so. So next time you call someone an abuser, think twice. I ask lichess to reinstate the feature of chosing color at least for the lobby. Opponents have the free choise to accept the offered color or just pick another.

BeDecentForAChange

#693

@AndrewWilis said in #692:

There was and is no need to change a good system. And 70 pages is a LOT. So yes, there is something to care about, but no one cares.

Or just a few noisy people that are throwing a tantrum. Sure there is something to care about, and Lichess clearly did care enough to push a protective updated

What "abuse" was there to fix?

The ability to force others to consistently play you at a disadvantage

ALL my games in the lobby i played BLACK since i wanted to improve my defence system.
So if players do the same with white, suddenly they are abusers.

Yes and no. The feature was abused by people to exclusively play white. Some of the complainers here had 80k+games with white and none with black. That's not practicing an opening, that's just abusing a feature.

Is there any written rule in lichess that allows you to call your fellow pkayers abusers?
Dont think so.

They were abusing a feature

So next time you call someone an abuser, think twice.

I did, they're still abusers

I ask lichess to reinstate the feature of chosing color at least for the lobby.
Opponents have the free choise to accept the offered color or just pick another.

Lichess is open source, you are free to make any update you see as an inprovement to the site while maintaining the fairness

@AndrewWilis said in #692: > There was and is no need to change a good system. And 70 pages is a LOT. So yes, there is something to care about, but no one cares. Or just a few noisy people that are throwing a tantrum. Sure there is something to care about, and Lichess clearly did care enough to push a protective updated > What "abuse" was there to fix? The ability to force others to consistently play you at a disadvantage > ALL my games in the lobby i played BLACK since i wanted to improve my defence system. > So if players do the same with white, suddenly they are abusers. Yes and no. The feature was abused by people to exclusively play white. Some of the complainers here had 80k+games with white and none with black. That's not practicing an opening, that's just abusing a feature. > Is there any written rule in lichess that allows you to call your fellow pkayers abusers? > Dont think so. They were abusing a feature > So next time you call someone an abuser, think twice. I did, they're still abusers > I ask lichess to reinstate the feature of chosing color at least for the lobby. > Opponents have the free choise to accept the offered color or just pick another. Lichess is open source, you are free to make any update you see as an inprovement to the site while maintaining the fairness

Munich

edited

#694

BeDecentforAChange said "They were abusing a feature"
No, nobody was an abuser. You have the option to chose a colour, and if players did, this was no abuse.

If there is an issue, it is that quickpairings were automatched with colour lobby seeks (if the few time controls to chose from in quickpairing matched the colour seeker in the lobby) . That is not the fault of any user.

There are other solutions: remove the quickpairings page, thus everybody needs to make a challenge via Lobby.
Or do not pair colour seekers with quickpairings, und less the quickpairers agree in there setting (a toggle button) that they truly do not care what colour they get.

There are more suggestions over 70 pages, but you do blabla only and no constructive comment of yours to improve the currently widely disabled feature of colour seeking. Your aim is to keep saying colour seekers were abusers. We understood your position, and 1/3 of all comments in this thread are from you, a player who did more comments in this one thread here than have played games at lichess. Likely because previous accounts of you have been banned, as you seem to know lichess well for many years, yet your account is quite new.

BeDecentforAChange said "They were abusing a feature" No, nobody was an abuser. You have the option to chose a colour, and if players did, this was no abuse. If there is an issue, it is that quickpairings were automatched with colour lobby seeks (if the few time controls to chose from in quickpairing matched the colour seeker in the lobby) . That is not the fault of any user. There are other solutions: remove the quickpairings page, thus everybody needs to make a challenge via Lobby. Or do not pair colour seekers with quickpairings, und less the quickpairers agree in there setting (a toggle button) that they truly do not care what colour they get. There are more suggestions over 70 pages, but you do blabla only and no constructive comment of yours to improve the currently widely disabled feature of colour seeking. Your aim is to keep saying colour seekers were abusers. We understood your position, and 1/3 of all comments in this thread are from you, a player who did more comments in this one thread here than have played games at lichess. Likely because previous accounts of you have been banned, as you seem to know lichess well for many years, yet your account is quite new.

BeDecentForAChange

#695

@Munich said in #694:

BeDecentforAChange said "They were abusing a feature"
No, nobody was an abuser. You have the option to chose a colour, and if players did, this was no abuse.

Wrong, they abused the option to choose, which is why they had to stop it.

If there is an issue, it is that quickpairings were automatched with colour lobby seeks (if the few time controls to chose from in quickpairing matched the colour seeker in the lobby) . That is not the fault of any user.

Even if that was the issue, the fault of the user was to abuse the option available.

There are other solutions: remove the quickpairings page, thus everybody needs to make a challenge via Lobby.
Or do not pair colour seekers with quickpairings, und less the quickpairers agree in there setting (a toggle button) that they truly do not care what colour they get.

And like always, we welcome the day that you annouce having build this option, with a link to the github contribution!

There are more suggestions over 70 pages, but you do blabla only and no constructive comment of yours to improve the currently widely disabled feature of colour seeking.

Nope, wrong.

Your aim is to keep saying colour seekers were abusers.

Not my aim, but that remains a fact, yes

We understood your position, and 1/3 of all comments in this thread are from you, a player who did more comments in this one thread here than have played games at lichess. Likely because previous accounts of you have been banned, as you seem to know lichess well for many years, yet your account is quite new.

Wrong again. And as usual, I invite you to tell me which account of mine has been banned. Of course, you have none, because everything you do here is say random, unsubstantiated nonsense, and when called on to back it up: you just ignore it and post more, new nonsense

@Munich said in #694: > BeDecentforAChange said "They were abusing a feature" > No, nobody was an abuser. You have the option to chose a colour, and if players did, this was no abuse. Wrong, they abused the option to choose, which is why they had to stop it. > If there is an issue, it is that quickpairings were automatched with colour lobby seeks (if the few time controls to chose from in quickpairing matched the colour seeker in the lobby) . That is not the fault of any user. Even if that was the issue, the fault of the user was to abuse the option available. > There are other solutions: remove the quickpairings page, thus everybody needs to make a challenge via Lobby. > Or do not pair colour seekers with quickpairings, und less the quickpairers agree in there setting (a toggle button) that they truly do not care what colour they get. And like always, we welcome the day that you annouce having build this option, with a link to the github contribution! > There are more suggestions over 70 pages, but you do blabla only and no constructive comment of yours to improve the currently widely disabled feature of colour seeking. Nope, wrong. > Your aim is to keep saying colour seekers were abusers. Not my aim, but that remains a fact, yes > We understood your position, and 1/3 of all comments in this thread are from you, a player who did more comments in this one thread here than have played games at lichess. Likely because previous accounts of you have been banned, as you seem to know lichess well for many years, yet your account is quite new. Wrong again. And as usual, I invite you to tell me which account of mine has been banned. Of course, you have none, because everything you do here is say random, unsubstantiated nonsense, and when called on to back it up: you just ignore it and post more, new nonsense

AndrewWilis

#696

@BeDecentForAChange said in #693:

Or just a few noisy people that are throwing a tantrum. Sure there is something to care about, and Lichess clearly did care enough to push a protective updated

You have no idea what this is about

The ability to force others to consistently play you at a disadvantage

since when is there a disadvantage. It is a 2 color game and thats just what it is ... a GAME

Yes and no. The feature was abused by people to exclusively play white. Some of the complainers here had 80k+games with white and none with black. That's not practicing an opening, that's just abusing a feature.

Yes and no is a nice phrase. Yet there is NO abuse against the rules. Its your free choise to accept a challenge and the color,

They were abusing a feature

You can only abuse a rule, yet there is NO RULE

I did, they're still abusers

You didnt think at all

Lichess is open source, you are free to make any update you see as an inprovement to the site while maintaining the fairness

Hah so i am allowed to change lichess ? Do you really think so? A bit ambitious. It woud need approval of the same people that took the feature away.

Definition:
An "abuser" is someone who abuses or mistreats others. This can happen in different ways, such as physical, emotional, sexual or psychological abuse. For example, an abuser can use violence, manipulate or intimidate someone, or abuse a position of power.
Think twice.

@BeDecentForAChange said in #693: > Or just a few noisy people that are throwing a tantrum. Sure there is something to care about, and Lichess clearly did care enough to push a protective updated - You have no idea what this is about > The ability to force others to consistently play you at a disadvantage - since when is there a disadvantage. It is a 2 color game and thats just what it is ... a GAME > Yes and no. The feature was abused by people to exclusively play white. Some of the complainers here had 80k+games with white and none with black. That's not practicing an opening, that's just abusing a feature. - Yes and no is a nice phrase. Yet there is NO abuse against the rules. Its your free choise to accept a challenge and the color, > They were abusing a feature - You can only abuse a rule, yet there is NO RULE > I did, they're still abusers - You didnt think at all > Lichess is open source, you are free to make any update you see as an inprovement to the site while maintaining the fairness - Hah so i am allowed to change lichess ? Do you really think so? A bit ambitious. It woud need approval of the same people that took the feature away. Definition: An "abuser" is someone who abuses or mistreats others. This can happen in different ways, such as physical, emotional, sexual or psychological abuse. For example, an abuser can use violence, manipulate or intimidate someone, or abuse a position of power. Think twice.

BeDecentForAChange edited

#697

@AndrewWilis said in #696:

You have no idea what this is about

Sure, I do. I just explained it to you

since when is there a disadvantage. It is a 2 color game and thats just what it is ... a GAME

Since always! Okay if it's just a game, no need to argue about this anymore then. You can just play two sides of the game, just like everyone else.

Yes and no is a nice phrase. Yet there is NO abuse against the rules. Its your free choise to accept a challenge and the color,

Thank you! Nope, not true. Fair players were matched against them on unfair conditions. This is fixed now

You can only abuse a rule, yet there is NO RULE

Nope, you can also abuse a feature. Or at least you could, not anymore.

You didnt think at all

Wrong! :__)

Hah so i am allowed to change lichess ? Do you really think so? A bit ambitious. It woud need approval of the same people that took the feature away.

Yes, there are lots of people who have helped contribute to Lichess. They probably won't allow you to roll back the improvements that battled abuse. But if you make something sustainable, surely it'll be merged.

Definition:
An "abuser" is someone who abuses or mistreats others. This can happen in different ways, such as physical, emotional, sexual or psychological abuse. For example, an abuser can use violence, manipulate or intimidate someone, or abuse a position of power.

I agree with that definition. They mistreated others for their own personal benefit. Well put

Think twice.

Upton thinking twice, twice, I concluded that I was more right than I even thought.

@AndrewWilis said in #696: > - You have no idea what this is about Sure, I do. I just explained it to you > - since when is there a disadvantage. It is a 2 color game and thats just what it is ... a GAME Since always! Okay if it's just a game, no need to argue about this anymore then. You can just play two sides of the game, just like everyone else. > - Yes and no is a nice phrase. Yet there is NO abuse against the rules. Its your free choise to accept a challenge and the color, Thank you! Nope, not true. Fair players were matched against them on unfair conditions. This is fixed now > - You can only abuse a rule, yet there is NO RULE Nope, you can also abuse a feature. Or at least you could, not anymore. > - You didnt think at all Wrong! :__) > - Hah so i am allowed to change lichess ? Do you really think so? A bit ambitious. It woud need approval of the same people that took the feature away. Yes, there are lots of people who have helped contribute to Lichess. They probably won't allow you to roll back the improvements that battled abuse. But if you make something sustainable, surely it'll be merged. > Definition: > An "abuser" is someone who abuses or mistreats others. This can happen in different ways, such as physical, emotional, sexual or psychological abuse. For example, an abuser can use violence, manipulate or intimidate someone, or abuse a position of power. I agree with that definition. They mistreated others for their own personal benefit. Well put > Think twice. Upton thinking twice, twice, I concluded that I was more right than I even thought.

dionlemton

#698

Oh good! This thread is still going xD

Roydestero_98_lims