10 Feb 05
4 edits
Clans
Trackhead's recent pronouncement that he intends to keep within the clan system (as a leader to boot) without a subscription raises the issue: for how long should a non-subscriber be allowed to retain their clan status?
Off the top of my head, I would think:
(1) without a star, a player can be assigned no more clan matches
(2) without a star; a clan leader can arrange no clan matches: within one month, the clan will become leaderless and require admin to define a new leader from those available and willing or the clan dies.(3) without a star, any member of a clan is removed from that clan after a month.
Tourneys
For the tourney system, without a star a player may finish all their current games but has a points total of zero regardless of wins / losses. Thus they never progress into the next round (if there is one).
Sieges
(1) Without a star, a player is removed from all sieges queues.
(2) Without a star, on the completion of a game, if the starless player wins, the board is then held by the next two players in line (the first being the new defender).
Perhaps this should be in three threads but there you go.
Edits: I still can't spell siege...
10 Feb 05
Originally posted by ToeI agree, but how long until something like that actually happens. The only problem I see is the 0 points thing in tournaments. But good idea though.
[b]Clans
Trackhead's recent pronouncement that he intends to keep within the clan system (as a leader to boot) without a subscription raises the issue: for how long should a non-subscriber be allowed to retain their clan status?
Off the top of my head, I would think:
(1) without a star, a player can be assigned no more clan matches
(2) without a star; ...[text shortened]... s this should be in three threads but there you go.
Edits: I still can't spell siege...[/b]
11 Feb 05
Originally posted by Toeyour ideas are good ... but need to be tempered just a little:
[b]Clans
Trackhead's recent pronouncement that he intends to keep within the clan system (as a leader to boot) without a subscription raises the issue: for how long should a non-subscriber be allowed to retain their clan status?
Off the top of my head, I would think:
(1) without a star, a player can be assigned no more clan matches
(2) without a star; ...[text shortened]... s this should be in three threads but there you go.
Edits: I still can't spell siege...[/b]
1/in all cases a cooling off period is required ... perhaps a month ... many people do not pay by credit card and time is needed.
2/do not punish the clan members for a clan leader being unstarred ... let the clan leader continue to make challenges for the other members of the clan .... especially until some usurption process is enabled (russ cannot be expected to have to do every clan leader change manually ... it needs to be automated ... perhaps by a voting process in the votes page)
11 Feb 05
Originally posted by ToeI do not agree. I'd say let the person in question finish the tourney in a normal fashion
[b]Clans
Tourneys
For the tourney system, without a star a player may finish all their current games but has a points total of zero regardless of wins / losses. Thus they never progress into the next round (if there is one).
13 Feb 05
1 edit
I dont agree with the tournies, what if you have been a memberfor a year, lose your subscription but have fallen on hard times and cant come up with the extra money for two months, and so your in the second round or final round of a tourney, but you cant gain any points or advance, i think thats kinda harsh, just let the guy finish it out, and say goodbye if he doesnt pay, or say hey, good job, im sure he will be thankful for not being outkasted because he couldnt have his star, cuz in my opinion it almost feels like thats the way your coming accross.
13 Feb 05
5 edits
Originally posted by Toei wonder ... is your main focus:
[b]Clans
Trackhead's recent pronouncement that he intends to keep within the clan system (as a leader to boot) without a subscription raises the issue: for how long should a non-subscriber be allowed to retain their clan status?
Off th ...[text shortened]... ads but there you go.
Edits: I still can't spell siege...[/b]
1/ the good of rhp
2/ the best for the tournaments
3/ nonsubscibers in general
4/ russ' bank account
5/ your personal issues with TRACKHEAD21
i suspect all 1,2,3 and 4 are best served if the nonsubscribers are given something good at rhp to keep them playing (obviously subscribers should gain even more).
on top of this ... consider an example ... consider: chess slayer: chess slayer joined rhp to play in the 2005 championship ... Chess Slayer's membership will run out a few days before the championship ends ... CS should be able to finish this tournament ... and win it ( if CS can !)
it looks impressive that your post has lots of recs ... but nonsubscibers cannot rec ... however they bring russ money through advertising ... and many end up subscribing at some stage ... i certainly will subscribe again at some stage in the future ... if i feel like hanging around for a while.
do not hurt 66% of rhp just to satisfy your anger ... TRACK entered some banded tourneys, removing him from them may be appropriate ... but do it because he is not, and never really was, a player under 1600, do not remove him because he is no longer subscribed.
13 Feb 05
Originally posted by BuGHoUsEMASTERSo? It's not like without you RHP wouldn't be able to keep itself financially afloat or anything. Yeah it's nice to have more people to play against, but then again, one starred person equals like five nonstars as far as number of games played at one time.
All you "stared" players is complain about non stars well, if it weren't for the non stars then there would he less then 1/3 left of RHP...
I think that when a subscription ends, the clan leader must revoke his position and there should be an immediate vote in the clan for who is the new leader. All games should be played out and count for whatever tournament, challenge or League they are for, but the only new games that can be initiated are the standard 6 games or less allowed to free members.
When the star is removed, the person should be immediately expelled from the clan.
The tourney suggestion seems reasonable.
I mostly like your ideas Toe. However people shouldn't be able to linger for a month using pawn star membership privelages, like clan membership.
15 Feb 05
Originally posted by The Slow PawnBut what about non-stars in clans and still challenging other clans (trackhead21)?
okay, lots of chat in this forum, but not conclusive answers ?
I however do agree with Quirine
that a member who started a tournament should be allowed to finish it (you only pay once to enter a tournament and you don't pay for every subsequent round).
Boris
that a member who joined a clan should be allowed to stay in it (you only pay once to enter a clan and you don't pay for every subsequent battle).
15 Feb 05
3 edits
Originally posted by flexmoreWonder away if you must but frankly I don't give a monkeys about TRACKHEAD21 specifically. His case just highlights the issue as being a current one. And PS: I don't appreciate the bold text on that: its wasn't really a 'wonder' was it? It was an accusation.
i wonder ... is your main focus:
...
5/ your personal issues with TRACKHEAD21
...
And the issue is this, (which I didn't want to spell out specifically, but as a surprising number of folks don't seem to see the holes in the current system, here we go):
RHP provides some limited free access for four reasons
1) to advertise the site
2) to collect advertising revenue from those without stars (minimal I suspect)
3) the limitation provides a reason for subscription and subscription keeps the site alive.
Edit 4) those that honestly can't afford to subscribe. Bad me for forgetting you guys: my apologies.
Using tourneys, clans and seiges, a player can thus
a) Obtain a one-month subscription
b) sign into every tourney and seige they can
c) join / create a clan for limitless games
As a result, they can wildly exceed the 6 game limit. Thus reason (3) is broken.
So, unless rules are created that specifically target abuse of the extended subscriber game options, RHP's subscription basis is open to basic, simple and effective circumnavigation.
15 Feb 05
Originally posted by ToeI do agree with you regarding the clan business - Once you haven't got a star you shouldn't be allowed in clan (general speaking) - and I'd say automatically kicked - The same applies to Sieges -
Wonder away if you must but frankly I don't give a monkeys about TRACKHEAD21 specifically. His case just highlights the issue as being a current one. And PS: I don't appreciate the bold text on that: its wasn't really a 'wonder' was it? It was an accusation.
And the issue is this, (which I didn't want to spell out specifically, but as a surprising numbe ...[text shortened]... options, RHP's subscription basis is open to basic, simple and effective circumnavigation.
But
I don't think that it is fair for people NOT to play out their tournament games - With people like Skeeter who move once every 7 days (on purpose) and who play on in games that are totally lost (dragging them out in the vain hope of getting a time-out) it feels right to progress anyone into the next round who qualifies - Let's face it, the advantages are minimal (as you can't enter to new tournaments once you're starless - and in effect you have supported the site)
Regards
Boris