Question or Suggestion

@VESPIN
I entirely agree with this player. Why not be allowed to play during vacation time to the extent that we wish to and are able to? Why punish everyone because a few abuse the system?

I have no problem with people knowing how many vacation days I have left.

Personally, I can’t see how that’s of any interest to anyone, but I don’t see it infringing on my privacy in any way.

I do think you should be able to move during vacation days. I generally use them when I’ll have limited access to the internet or my phone. So I will sometimes be able to make moves, just not daily.

I have no opinion about it being a subscriber only feature or not.

I rarely use my vacation time...even when on vacation. I don’t have a problem with the total days being reduced. That being said, why should the number of days be visible? People seem to be protesting that vacation is being used as a strategy. By making it visible, it will also become a tool of strategy. My $0.02 is leave it be, perhaps with reduced days.

@jmwinrider said
3. The reason I care is because some players use this setting as a way filtering which games they move in and which games they make wait.

There's a better solution to that, though, which has already been suggested several times and for some *cough* reason been rejected out of hand:

As soon as you make a single move in a single game, your vacation ends. That second. In all games.

@lise said
@VESPIN
I entirely agree with this player. Why not be allowed to play during vacation time to the extent that we wish to and are able to? Why punish everyone because a few abuse the system?

Because that is abusing the system.

Either you're playing, and both you and your opponent can be timed out; or you are safe from time-outs, and so is your opponent, because you don't play. Expecting your opponent to move on time but not wanting to be timed out yourself - that very much is abusive.

@shallow-blue said
There's a better solution to that, though, which has already been suggested several times and for some *cough* reason been rejected out of hand:

As soon as you make a single move in a single game, your vacation ends. That second. In all games.

And then get timed out in all the other games as you move, that's dumb.

Do I hear any support for 14 days vacation and then transactions to buy more days? 😀

Support the site and get what you want!

I am in favor of making it public. I am also OK if people move while on vacation.

I don't mind my vacation allotment being visible. I used to think 36 days rather generous but now I am retired it is more useful. I also only use it as back up that I may not have internet access. I move less often when on holiday but I rarely stop altogether so I would not like being on vacation meaning I cannot move. What happens to the games that time out while away? At the moment we are encouraged to make sure we have moved before vacation finishes.
My personal bug bare is someone using vacation to extend 0-21 games. I currently have an opponent who is on vacation and moving. I have 8+days left but he has used all his time. He is clearly not away as he is moving in all his 0-21 games in this tournament and has no time left. This is an area that needs to be addressed more than how much vacation is left.

@Russ
Vacation status made public....
I am not in agreement with the making of vacation days remaining and/or lengths/duration of vacations being made public, and I'm uncertain of the arguments to make such public. It had never even crossed my mind. Some times, as a multi-move daily player, if I know I'm going to not be able to move regularly for a day or 2, I'll use a vacation day or 2, just in case, although I'll sometimes make moves while this vacation is in progress. I have never found any problem with or anything unfair about the system as it is now. As to the internet being everywhere now: even with such access, someone's situation might not allow for him/her to be in a position to move regularly, and/or might not have the ability to truly sit down and take the time that these games deserve. And sometimes people have family or other emergencies which prevent them from making moves for several days, even weeks. (I found myself in such a situation a few times, and I watched my rating go from 1400+ to under 700.) Regardless of how or when they are used, VACATION DAYS ARE IMPORTANT TO HAVE--FOR EVERYONE. Whether or not the 36 days is too much and should be lessened is another issue. I do not believe, personally, that the 36 days per year is excessive. If it is to be lowered, 21 days would perhaps be too little. Perhaps 28 days should be considered as well.
Also something to be considered might be whether or not someone can still claim a timeout win while on vacation.
David (76Xadrez)

@jmwinrider
Happy for my vacation time to be shown - it doesn’t really matter that much

In favour of showing the vacation time, also don't see the harm.

The other suggestion is to remove vacation privilege for hardcore tournaments (has been suggested multiple times).

There are a number of players that use vacation break purely to slow the game to suit there game plan but it seems they still are making moves in some games ,if I see that player in a competition I try to avoid taking part i like the idea of seeing how many days a player has left on there vacation break but win or not it's just another game

Thank you everyone for posting into this thread. It is really enlightening to get everyone's opinion on this.

I'm not sure I communicated clearly the intention in the message that was broadcast to all subscribers. Which was to show how many of the annually allocated days remain , not individual vacation length.

I want to reassure anyone concerned about showing actual vacation length that I agree - individual vacations are potentially sensitive - so if this is added, this will be optional (defaulting to "private" ) and set per vacation at the time of booking. (As a side note - the vacation booking form needs an over-haul anyway, so this may happen then.)

The no-vacation during hardcore tournaments requires a separate consultation, and I will seriously consider that in the future.