Lichess needs a “are you still there” button, to prevent people from just running out the clock - and if the player continues saying they are there without moving, it should double the ban time given for running out the clock
what if they don't respond to the button?
Chess - the game of thinkers and philosophers ... who have no time :(
@sheckley666
We need this button and it's not about time spent playing – it's about time wasted. I already proposed something similar but didn't receive any feedback.
lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/feature-suggestion-to-avoid-green-leavers-in-slow-games#1
Slow games can turn into a very frustrating experience. Right now, any user can leave the browser tab open and take his dog for a walk while his opponent wastes 30 minutes or more. I know, in Rapid and Blitz this isn't a problem, but anything slower than 15+0 needs this option.
We need this button and it's not about time spent playing – it's about time wasted. I already proposed something similar but didn't receive any feedback.
lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/feature-suggestion-to-avoid-green-leavers-in-slow-games#1
Slow games can turn into a very frustrating experience. Right now, any user can leave the browser tab open and take his dog for a walk while his opponent wastes 30 minutes or more. I know, in Rapid and Blitz this isn't a problem, but anything slower than 15+0 needs this option.
I'm playing almost exclusively 15+10, which is slower than 15+0 - and I would hate it to know that my opponent could interrupt my thinking by just asking me, if I am still here.
There is a reason, why OTB it is strictly forbidden to distract the opponent.
Also, it happens very rarely to me, that I really have to wait for more than let's say five minutes. It had been far worse when I started here.
There is a reason, why OTB it is strictly forbidden to distract the opponent.
Also, it happens very rarely to me, that I really have to wait for more than let's say five minutes. It had been far worse when I started here.
@sheckley666
In OTB chess you know what your opponent is doing because he's in front of you. This is online chess and there's no such commitment and seriousness; a user can take revenge if he loses material. This button would be a pain in the ###, you're right, but being forced to waste 30 or 40 minutes that one had reserved for playing chess would be a thing of the past.
In OTB chess you know what your opponent is doing because he's in front of you. This is online chess and there's no such commitment and seriousness; a user can take revenge if he loses material. This button would be a pain in the ###, you're right, but being forced to waste 30 or 40 minutes that one had reserved for playing chess would be a thing of the past.
@FyM020 said in #7:
> @sheckley666
>
> In OTB chess you know what your opponent is doing because he's in front of you. This is online chess and there's no such commitment and seriousness; a user can take revenge if he loses material. This button would be a pain in the ###, you're right, but being forced to waste 30 or 40 minutes that one had reserved for playing chess would be a thing of the past.
This seems to be a somewhat bizarre suggestion. What if I'm in time trouble and my opponent starts abusing this feature to distract me? This is already possible with draw offers and those actually serve a legitimate purpose over the course of the game. Obviously, you would never select "no", because that would require being present, so the realistic options are either "yes" or not responding to it. If there is no timeout for not responding to it at all (that is to say, that if after e.g. 90 seconds I do not respond to this, then it will punish me further or force me to resign) then it doesn't seem like a useful feature, it's just invasive and there doesn't seem to be a point.
Also, there are times that I have timed out spending the remainder of my time looking for a solution, and I received an automated message telling me if I keep doing this I'll be banned. (These were all bullet games, maybe it triggers this message based on a percentage of the total time being used?) This suggestion has the potential to exacerbate this exact situation.
Also, schekley666 brought up a good point- what if I'm in the middle of a game thinking, then I receive this message? it would absolutely throw off your train of thought to have to manually select yes and acknowledge that you're still there, and this would waste the time of honest players- which, ironically, seems to be the very thing that this suggestion was intended to prevent in the first place.
I can definitely sympathize with you that this is annoying to deal with, it's happened to me during online games before and on other websites (one time my opponent had like 90 minutes, it sucked) and even in an OTB game once, but this solution is worse than the actual problem because it has such a huge potential for abuse, and measures to prevent its abuse would render it superfluous.
> @sheckley666
>
> In OTB chess you know what your opponent is doing because he's in front of you. This is online chess and there's no such commitment and seriousness; a user can take revenge if he loses material. This button would be a pain in the ###, you're right, but being forced to waste 30 or 40 minutes that one had reserved for playing chess would be a thing of the past.
This seems to be a somewhat bizarre suggestion. What if I'm in time trouble and my opponent starts abusing this feature to distract me? This is already possible with draw offers and those actually serve a legitimate purpose over the course of the game. Obviously, you would never select "no", because that would require being present, so the realistic options are either "yes" or not responding to it. If there is no timeout for not responding to it at all (that is to say, that if after e.g. 90 seconds I do not respond to this, then it will punish me further or force me to resign) then it doesn't seem like a useful feature, it's just invasive and there doesn't seem to be a point.
Also, there are times that I have timed out spending the remainder of my time looking for a solution, and I received an automated message telling me if I keep doing this I'll be banned. (These were all bullet games, maybe it triggers this message based on a percentage of the total time being used?) This suggestion has the potential to exacerbate this exact situation.
Also, schekley666 brought up a good point- what if I'm in the middle of a game thinking, then I receive this message? it would absolutely throw off your train of thought to have to manually select yes and acknowledge that you're still there, and this would waste the time of honest players- which, ironically, seems to be the very thing that this suggestion was intended to prevent in the first place.
I can definitely sympathize with you that this is annoying to deal with, it's happened to me during online games before and on other websites (one time my opponent had like 90 minutes, it sucked) and even in an OTB game once, but this solution is worse than the actual problem because it has such a huge potential for abuse, and measures to prevent its abuse would render it superfluous.
You play every game at blitz/bullet speed.
Out of 666 rapid games you've played only 78 have lasted ten minutes or more.
Why play long time control games and let yourself get mated in the first minute?
If you keep losing rapid games to people 300 points lower blitz rated than you, just because they spend some time thinking that's a problem you can solve by yourself.
Out of 666 rapid games you've played only 78 have lasted ten minutes or more.
Why play long time control games and let yourself get mated in the first minute?
If you keep losing rapid games to people 300 points lower blitz rated than you, just because they spend some time thinking that's a problem you can solve by yourself.
@Andnar
"This seems to be a somewhat bizarre suggestion. What if I'm in time trouble and my opponent starts abusing this feature to distract me?"
That would be impossible. In my first comment (#5) there's a link to the post I wrote eight months ago, in which I proposed an **automatic** pop-up based on time between moves, which is based on time control (in a 45+0 game, the pop-up would appear after 67.5 seconds without any new moves; the option to claim the game would appear after 202.5 seconds, that is, two "Are you still thinking?" without answer after the first one). That's 202.5 seconds instead of the 1740 I had to wait in that game.
Or it could appear after 270 seconds the first time, 67.5 the second, and a third after another 67.5, this last time with a minute to hit "yes" before the system gives the option to claim the game. I'm sure a more intelligent and skilled person could design a system with the minimum level of annoyance for both players. The point is to shorten the time that passes until the option to claim the game is given.
"Also, there are times that I have timed out spending the remainder of my time looking for a solution, and I received an automated message telling me if I keep doing this I'll be banned. (These were all bullet games, maybe it triggers this message based on a percentage of the total time being used?) This suggestion has the potential to exacerbate this exact situation. "
Implementing this feature for bullet games would be a stupid idea. No fast time control should have such pop-ups.
"Also, schekley666 brought up a good point- what if I'm in the middle of a game thinking, then I receive this message? it would absolutely throw off your train of thought to have to manually select yes and acknowledge that you're still there, and this would waste the time of honest players- which, ironically, seems to be the very thing that this suggestion was intended to prevent in the first place."
I know it's a good point, but the current situation is that honest players can be trolled by a green leaver. I think the distraction is better than facing a green leaver with 35 minutes on his clock.
"I can definitely sympathize with you that this is annoying to deal with, it's happened to me during online games before and on other websites (one time my opponent had like 90 minutes, it sucked) and even in an OTB game once, but this solution is worse than the actual problem because it has such a huge potential for abuse, and measures to prevent its abuse would render it superfluous."
I want to make an observation from my perspective as a patzer: when the rating of your opponent is too low and the game too slow, your risk of facing a green leaver goes up. I was 800 in Rapid a year ago, and lack of sportsmanship is the common currency at those levels. The same applies for Classical. Blitz? I don't remember a single 800 doing that.
I wouldn't be surpised if you said you played more slow games OTB than online, but lots of enthusiast patzers need slow games to improve, and green leavers are somewhat allowed to do what they want, which is discouraging.
Strong players like you play mainly fast games, you don't need online Classical (even if you like it). In case you wanted to play, you would surely be paired with a 2200 or stronger, and I don't imagine such strong players leaving the game after a blunder instead of resigning. The situation may be different for lower ranked people.
Since there's no solution to this problem, I'll stick to Correspondence.
"This seems to be a somewhat bizarre suggestion. What if I'm in time trouble and my opponent starts abusing this feature to distract me?"
That would be impossible. In my first comment (#5) there's a link to the post I wrote eight months ago, in which I proposed an **automatic** pop-up based on time between moves, which is based on time control (in a 45+0 game, the pop-up would appear after 67.5 seconds without any new moves; the option to claim the game would appear after 202.5 seconds, that is, two "Are you still thinking?" without answer after the first one). That's 202.5 seconds instead of the 1740 I had to wait in that game.
Or it could appear after 270 seconds the first time, 67.5 the second, and a third after another 67.5, this last time with a minute to hit "yes" before the system gives the option to claim the game. I'm sure a more intelligent and skilled person could design a system with the minimum level of annoyance for both players. The point is to shorten the time that passes until the option to claim the game is given.
"Also, there are times that I have timed out spending the remainder of my time looking for a solution, and I received an automated message telling me if I keep doing this I'll be banned. (These were all bullet games, maybe it triggers this message based on a percentage of the total time being used?) This suggestion has the potential to exacerbate this exact situation. "
Implementing this feature for bullet games would be a stupid idea. No fast time control should have such pop-ups.
"Also, schekley666 brought up a good point- what if I'm in the middle of a game thinking, then I receive this message? it would absolutely throw off your train of thought to have to manually select yes and acknowledge that you're still there, and this would waste the time of honest players- which, ironically, seems to be the very thing that this suggestion was intended to prevent in the first place."
I know it's a good point, but the current situation is that honest players can be trolled by a green leaver. I think the distraction is better than facing a green leaver with 35 minutes on his clock.
"I can definitely sympathize with you that this is annoying to deal with, it's happened to me during online games before and on other websites (one time my opponent had like 90 minutes, it sucked) and even in an OTB game once, but this solution is worse than the actual problem because it has such a huge potential for abuse, and measures to prevent its abuse would render it superfluous."
I want to make an observation from my perspective as a patzer: when the rating of your opponent is too low and the game too slow, your risk of facing a green leaver goes up. I was 800 in Rapid a year ago, and lack of sportsmanship is the common currency at those levels. The same applies for Classical. Blitz? I don't remember a single 800 doing that.
I wouldn't be surpised if you said you played more slow games OTB than online, but lots of enthusiast patzers need slow games to improve, and green leavers are somewhat allowed to do what they want, which is discouraging.
Strong players like you play mainly fast games, you don't need online Classical (even if you like it). In case you wanted to play, you would surely be paired with a 2200 or stronger, and I don't imagine such strong players leaving the game after a blunder instead of resigning. The situation may be different for lower ranked people.
Since there's no solution to this problem, I'll stick to Correspondence.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.