Timeouts for refusing opponents you asked not to have

¿No estaras reclamando por que excedieron en 1 punto tus preferencias?

Puede ser, sí. Porque quería saber - ¿existen los límites en la realidad? ¿Dónde se encuentran - a un sólo punto, a unos diez, veinte, dónde exactemente?

@ejhchess said in #37:
> What happens, now and then, ism I set up a game, blitz, casual, 5+4...

Thanks, I'll do some 5+4 casual tests and start combing through Lichess' 1000+ open issues.
github.com/lichess-org/lichobile/issues
github.com/lichess-org/lila/issues
github.com/lichess-org/api/issues

So far I found github.com/lichess-org/lichobile/issues/1727 but that might be a red herring.

So far I've failed to duplicate this from a browser, but did get a close game:

I have this evening been given another opponent outside my requested range! I aborted the game, and no timeout as yet.

As a side note, this thread is full of unrequested answers by folks I would consider to also be out of OPs range... What's the point of some many non-devs jumping in?

Also, what I find a bit disturbing is @Toadofsky posting flamentory content that bemuses that unhelpful range of posters at the cost of OP. That's poor form, but at last something is being done now.

What could help you @ejhchess is to add [bug] in the title; although this may turn out to be not so, it has the advantage that eleven-years-old don't jump in all that much. Saves you time and nerves. And once you locate a dev, start a private conversation with them; they'll tell you if they dislike it, but most certainly they won't. It's quite commode, and you spare yourself the publicity.

Cheers, s.

Cheers, that's good advice.

On the offchance that this problem is being caused by faulty code somewhere unexpected, I instructed OP to (a) match some of his app preferences to match those set when logged in via browser; and afterwards (b) delete all of his open sessions. OP will report back if the problem keeps occuring, or better yet, a dev gets in touch with him.

I completely agree with OP that neither should this pairing-beyond-range be occuring, nor should aborting a game against opposition-beyond-range be penalised if it indeed will occur occasionally. I understand it may cause workload either way - fixing the problem or (having the system) distinguishing between abusive and justified abortions - but it should be worth investigating, and if unable to fix, stated in some way right next to the range specification.

And once again, I get an opponent from outside the specifically requested range, I abort the game for that reason and immediately this triggers a ban. A long ban, too.

This is quite serious now and although I have previously enjoyed lichess I am now very annoyed with the site. It cannot possibly be right to insist that users play opponents that they have requested not to have, by punishing them if they do not.

I understand timeouts for persistently refusing opponents: that's one thing. But penalising them for refusing opponents outside their range, that is quite another.

I have repeatedly asked whether lichess understand that this is happening, i.e. whether this is deliberate, or whether this is a bug. I cannot find out. All that happens is that I either have to keep accepting opponents I have properly asked not to have, or to keep refusing them and get longer and longer bans as a result.

Thus is causing me no little grief, and it's pretty shabby on lichess's part.

@Toadofsky I remember you tried to reproduce the error - did you do so in >> unrated 5+4 << ? Maybe you'd have another look at this, and possibly forward this (what looks to be a) technical issue to the devs, together with the ticket to not penalize players for aborting games against opposition outside of the requested range?