The warning given to a player for not making their first move is an irrelevancy if that player doesn't even show up for the game. The offender doesn't even SEE the warning.
Surely it would be better simply to award the points to the player who is wasting their time?
One shouldn't get points for not playing a game.
@Oscillations but one should get a warning one doesn't even necessarily see?
In addition, the warnings are at times bizarre: one guy had a warning while playing 0+1 against me because he couldn't see his move for under 4 seconds and lost!
@Toutatis the message is only for the opponent of the offending player. The offending player does get a warning message himself in the notifications tab if it happens too often I think.
The warning is only for the opponent of the offending player? What's the point of that?
The point is that the opponents don't complain in the forums about the players because they don't know that the players are penalized. That is what happened before this message was introduced.
#1 Also I've previously discussed this false equivocation re: "didn't show up".
#4 "too often", "I think"...?
#6 So it's a pacifier for the offended-against?
#7 "false equivocation"? Often, players who "receive" the message have not had a green light on at all. Then, one assumes, they were disconnected or just "didn't show up".
Overall, I see the thought process behind it; but the question is, if it is working, why do so many players still offend? Also, why in a 0+1 is a player who can't spot a move in a few seconds penalised?
#8, „penalized“. Please explain the „penalty“, what is different after being „penalized“?
#9 They receive a "warning message" - I'm trying to work out myself what the difference is. No one seems to understand what happens, because no one has told us!
