<Comment deleted by user>
@BeDecentForAChange said in #401:
> Go to any player, click challenge, pick black
Do you realise how inconvenient it is?
So, to balance between black and white, you now have to CHOOSE your opponent. Do you think it is a progress for Lichess? For me it is a regression.
> Go to any player, click challenge, pick black
Do you realise how inconvenient it is?
So, to balance between black and white, you now have to CHOOSE your opponent. Do you think it is a progress for Lichess? For me it is a regression.
@solo59 said in #404:
> Do you realise how inconvenient it is?
So is being forced to play someone under unfair circumstances.
> Do you realise how inconvenient it is?
So is being forced to play someone under unfair circumstances.
@BeDecentForAChange said in #405:
> So is being forced to play someone under unfair circumstances.
You did not read may suggestion: assign people who want to play black with people who want to play white. Where is it unfair if both sides agree? I am playing like this for years. It was not a problem.
> So is being forced to play someone under unfair circumstances.
You did not read may suggestion: assign people who want to play black with people who want to play white. Where is it unfair if both sides agree? I am playing like this for years. It was not a problem.
@solo59 said in #404:
> So, to balance between black and white, you now have to CHOOSE your opponent. Do you think it is a progress for Lichess? For me it is a regression.
It's progress that you can no longer force your opponents to play a certain color unless they agree to it explicitly. This used to be the case. That's golden progress
> So, to balance between black and white, you now have to CHOOSE your opponent. Do you think it is a progress for Lichess? For me it is a regression.
It's progress that you can no longer force your opponents to play a certain color unless they agree to it explicitly. This used to be the case. That's golden progress
@solo59 said in #406:
> You did not read may suggestion: assign people who want to play black with people who want to play white. Where is it unfair if both sides agree? I am playing like this for years. It was not a problem.
It was enough of a problem for the site to have to take away the option.
As for your suggestion, some other people have also raised this. It could be worth checking if the development and upkeep resources would outweigh the objective benefit of having this feature. But you would have to find a developer that wants to invest time for it
> You did not read may suggestion: assign people who want to play black with people who want to play white. Where is it unfair if both sides agree? I am playing like this for years. It was not a problem.
It was enough of a problem for the site to have to take away the option.
As for your suggestion, some other people have also raised this. It could be worth checking if the development and upkeep resources would outweigh the objective benefit of having this feature. But you would have to find a developer that wants to invest time for it
@gwendolino764 said in #410:
> I realised this comment was not directed at me. But I am happy taking pictures brings you so much joy
Must be a problem with the code, the wrong people are talking to each other xD
> I realised this comment was not directed at me. But I am happy taking pictures brings you so much joy
Must be a problem with the code, the wrong people are talking to each other xD
@Sofia-Mary said in #402:
> No. You already told us, that the wrong people are paired, the players do not have any response for this shit. And you guessed, that a lot do not know about the wrong code pairings. So, they can not abuse, they used a button to used for without knowing about the consequences.
Of course they can abuse it, they did so. Even if they did not understand the pairing policy, they knew what they were doing by picking exclusively their favourite color.
> There is a code problem you made clear to us, and now ...you fall back to older arguments?
Where in the code is the problem? Please link to the GitHub repo with the relevant code and highlight the erroneous code please. In case you missed it earlier: there are no issues in the code that are causing this. Thibault removed it because of abusers.
> No. You already told us, that the wrong people are paired, the players do not have any response for this shit. And you guessed, that a lot do not know about the wrong code pairings. So, they can not abuse, they used a button to used for without knowing about the consequences.
Of course they can abuse it, they did so. Even if they did not understand the pairing policy, they knew what they were doing by picking exclusively their favourite color.
> There is a code problem you made clear to us, and now ...you fall back to older arguments?
Where in the code is the problem? Please link to the GitHub repo with the relevant code and highlight the erroneous code please. In case you missed it earlier: there are no issues in the code that are causing this. Thibault removed it because of abusers.
@BeDecentForAChange said in #401:
> Go to any player, click challenge, pick black
I'm supposed to go searching and ask every player?
That would be like trying to sell my car. But instead of posting an ad on the Internet and waiting to see who expresses interest, would I rather walk from door to door, ring the doorbell and ask if anyone wants to buy my car?
I used to be able to put my match offer online and within seconds the next opponent would be at the starting line. If that's no longer possible, lichess no longer makes sense for me.
> Go to any player, click challenge, pick black
I'm supposed to go searching and ask every player?
That would be like trying to sell my car. But instead of posting an ad on the Internet and waiting to see who expresses interest, would I rather walk from door to door, ring the doorbell and ask if anyone wants to buy my car?
I used to be able to put my match offer online and within seconds the next opponent would be at the starting line. If that's no longer possible, lichess no longer makes sense for me.
@teddyd said in #413:
> I'm supposed to go searching and ask every player?
Not at all! You can simply go to the lobby, enter it, and you will play a game almost instantly.
> That would be like trying to sell my car. But instead of posting an ad on the Internet and waiting to see who expresses interest, would I rather walk from door to door, ring the doorbell and ask if anyone wants to buy my car?
> I used to be able to put my match offer online and within seconds the next opponent would be at the starting line. If that's no longer possible, lichess no longer makes sense for me.
You can still do that, the lobby is where it used to be
> I'm supposed to go searching and ask every player?
Not at all! You can simply go to the lobby, enter it, and you will play a game almost instantly.
> That would be like trying to sell my car. But instead of posting an ad on the Internet and waiting to see who expresses interest, would I rather walk from door to door, ring the doorbell and ask if anyone wants to buy my car?
> I used to be able to put my match offer online and within seconds the next opponent would be at the starting line. If that's no longer possible, lichess no longer makes sense for me.
You can still do that, the lobby is where it used to be
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.