Search by Author (Last month only)
Public forum posts since 09 Jan '23 .
Enter the exact name of the post author
  1. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    04 Feb '23 23:23
    @russ said
    @medullah

    After 30 days of no activity, I would consider an account abandoned in most cases.
    Since we have actually had this happen here twice, if the clan leader dies, the clan is screwed for a month? Since you have the controls, why would it be such a problem (if an alternate leader was named) to swap them after a week. If the clan leader returned, He/she could message the acting leader to swap back, and you wouldn't have to get involved. Just a thought. None of us are getting any younger you know!!
  2. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    01 Feb '23 22:10
    @medullah
    In theory yes, but in reality it won't work.
    First because most players don't want any part of running a clan.
    Second, it takes a while to learn how the controls work on running a clan, and if someone wasn't there to help you figure it out, it can cause more harm than good.

    Following your idea, perhaps if each team had a clan member in waiting who would be willing to run the clan if the leader went AWOL or was incapacitated, that might work. They would have to notify Russ so he could make the switch.
  3. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    01 Feb '23 20:56
    @Mctayto
    You were a sandbagger. You dumped games in tournaments, you dumped games after three moves to benefit clans playing against us. You were a cheat from the get go.
    I can't get any of you geniuses to admit you are wrong when I say, the rating system is a joke. Since it is a joke, it doesn't matter. Since it doesn't matter, how can you sandbag a rating? But what YOU did was sway games to people of your choosing.
  4. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    01 Feb '23 16:11
    @Booger
    You see, people like you have no clue. I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you. Seek help
  5. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    01 Feb '23 16:09
    @Booger
    Uh, we all already know that the ratings are all farcical. Why do you give a damn about how the rating is affected? You cannot have it both ways. I think I made this point by saying if the clan leaders don't have a reasonable idea of a players strength, they are dead anyway. The rating takes into account all of the games, whether it be tournament, skittles, or clan games. How do you figure it is only dealing with clan rating?? I have been an open book since I started here. We have never cheated or broken a single rule as evidenced by the facts that we have been investigated ad nauseum and always found to be legal. You want to create a new set of rules, fine. We all play by those same rules. Been there, done that, got several T-shirts and still kept winning.
  6. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    01 Feb '23 00:00
    @sands-al said
    i think the winning clan should get points only for the games they won, the losing team none, in a 10 match challenge it does seem odd that if it finishes 6-4 you get 10 points as you only won 6 games so 6 points, none for the losing team, awarding points for all matches will just help the larger teams more as they can lose a large challenge and still rake in lots of points
    Al, the purpose for the large point totals as rewards or penalties was originated to encourage large challenges. It is highly unlikely that in a 20v20 challenge you would have 28 draws and 12 defining games as Booger likes to insinuate. Do you believe that a team that wins a 20 man challenge 10.9 - 9.5 should only be awarded 1 point for such a huge investment in time and energy to play the match? Likewise, if a challenge is won 19-1, you are saying the winning team in only entitled to a 1 point win (as in a won challenge is +1 and a lost challenge is -1 )? Neither of those options are going to encourage large challenges. Based on this thought process, does a 10-10 challenge get zero points for each side?? Hardly seems fair because of the effort involved, does it?

    You have seen many different approaches utilized to challenges. Taking on the challenges with maximum risk of lost points, should generate the most points for the winning team. Risk vs reward.

    The true facts of the matter is all clans are not willing to put forth the effort necessary to get to the top. Since I began as a clan leader in 2008, there have been three different sets of rules changes in an attempt to thwart how clan chess was to be played. Each set of changes required a different mind set to play them, but in the end, most clans didn't want to play hard enough to get to the top.

    I have listened for so long about people getting bent about resigning games once a challenge was already decided, I am deaf to it. The games are of no relevance, the challenge outcome will not change, everyone knows the rating system is a crock so it isn't bothering that (although that is the crutch they still rely on crying about). When professional sports teams play a best of 5 or best of 7 series in the playoffs, once one team has achieved the minimum number of wins necessary to win the challenge, they don't play any more games. Why? Because those games would be meaningless. No different here. Think about it.

    If you really want to clean this mess up, limit all players to one clan only. Then you eliminate a bunch of the manipulation that is going on right now. The concept is this is a team endeavor, not an individual endeavor. Any time two clans match up where a player is a member of both clans, he/she is ineligible to participate in that challenge. Another problem is the physical make up of clans is not close to equal with some teams stacked with strong players and others will many lower rated players. I can go on for a long time on this, and it has fallen on deaf ears. Too many whining about the unfair advantage this team or that team has, while not realizing that the shortcoming is on them, the whiners. The goal of clan chess is to win more points than all of the other clans. Simple. To do so, you need to play a lot of games and win a lot of those games. Period. The team that wants it the most, in most cases ends up victorious.
  7. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    31 Jan '23 23:24
    @booger said
    @mghrn55

    You have players that have 300 more wins than losses? On guy has 500 more wins than losses...


    That math is impossible Their rating should have gone up drastically. Oh wait...they lost regular games which keeps their rating down 🙄
    How convenient...
    Your problem is you don't understand math
  8. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    24 Jan '23 18:23
    @mghrnss
    Newbie?........NOT
    Smart ?.........DEFINITELY NOT
  9. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    24 Jan '23 18:21
    @mghrnss
    New User??? Maury determined THAT is a lie!!
  10. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    24 Jan '23 01:13
    @Very-Rusty
    We do know he is gutless and he is a liar, as do you.
  11. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    92832
    22 Jan '23 18:29
    @mghrnss said
    "It is nice to know that the last few years have been played cleanly"

    😂😂😂😂😂
    How would you know?
Back to Top

Search Site Content

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree