Does we can make a claim about supposed unsportlike conduct ?

[BB0DAY]

Fair enough, thanks for the feedback.

I guess all I can do is bemoan my fate and focus on tournaments that don't kick you out for being late.

That said, I remain convinced that this victory was stolen from me.

[tbhp]

[...] players would have to decide at this specific moment if they want to kick them out or not. Once their next move is done, they can't kick out the player anymore.

That seems like a rule that would benefit everyone, [...]

can you really not see the very common use case where nice players give grace for a while but then the player is dragging on and on and then disappears again while still in the middle of the game?

in your suggestion, when i let them go to -2 and they then do 1 move and then they are gone for good, i have lost my rights to kick?

i think his scenario is more common than you seem to assume.

I don't see the problem. If they decide not to kick out, it means they've considered the possibility you describe and are fine it. And if they didn't, then maybe they should have kicked out when they got the chance. In any case, it wouldn't make sense to complain when they made their choice.

[SiRan90]

[...] players would have to decide at this specific moment if they want to kick them out or not. Once their next move is done, they can't kick out the player anymore.

That seems like a rule that would benefit everyone, [...]

can you really not see the very common use case where nice players give grace for a while but then the player is dragging on and on and then disappears again while still in the middle of the game?

in your suggestion, when i let them go to -2 and they then do 1 move and then they are gone for good, i have lost my rights to kick?

i think his scenario is more common than you seem to assume.

I don't see the problem. If they decide not to kick out, it means they've considered the possibility you describe and are fine it. And if they didn't, then maybe they should have kicked out when they got the chance. In any case, it wouldn't make sense to complain when they made their choice.

In turn based games I might get not know they have went 1 hour over their time before playing their turn. That person then can hold the game hostage

[Silene]

[...] players would have to decide at this specific moment if they want to kick them out or not. Once their next move is done, they can't kick out the player anymore.

That seems like a rule that would benefit everyone, [...]

can you really not see the very common use case where nice players give grace for a while but then the player is dragging on and on and then disappears again while still in the middle of the game?

in your suggestion, when i let them go to -2 and they then do 1 move and then they are gone for good, i have lost my rights to kick?

i think his scenario is more common than you seem to assume.

I don't see the problem. If they decide not to kick out, it means they've considered the possibility you describe and are fine it. And if they didn't, then maybe they should have kicked out when they got the chance. In any case, it wouldn't make sense to complain when they made their choice.

The problem is i cannot see what's gonna happen in the future. Some possibilities are ok for me and some are not. I don't want to have to decide before I know what's it gonna be.

[tbhp]

can you really not see the very common use case where nice players give grace for a while but then the player is dragging on and on and then disappears again while still in the middle of the game?

in your suggestion, when i let them go to -2 and they then do 1 move and then they are gone for good, i have lost my rights to kick?

i think his scenario is more common than you seem to assume.

I don't see the problem. If they decide not to kick out, it means they've considered the possibility you describe and are fine it. And if they didn't, then maybe they should have kicked out when they got the chance. In any case, it wouldn't make sense to complain when they made their choice.

The problem is i cannot see what's gonna happen in the future. Some possibilities are ok for me and some are not. I don't want to have to decide before I know what's it gonna be.

But you would have to decide one way or another. I'm not sure what the problem is. Life is all about making choices, often times while lacking future information that could make our choices more informed. But what can we do? We still have to choose something.

[Silene]

I don't see the problem. If they decide not to kick out, it means they've considered the possibility you describe and are fine it. And if they didn't, then maybe they should have kicked out when they got the chance. In any case, it wouldn't make sense to complain when they made their choice.

The problem is i cannot see what's gonna happen in the future. Some possibilities are ok for me and some are not. I don't want to have to decide before I know what's it gonna be.

But you would have to decide one way or another. I'm not sure what the problem is. Life is all about making choices, often times while lacking future information that could make our choices more informed. But what can we do? We still have to choose something.

Yes, I would have to - in your approach. Just saying I like the approach that is currently implemented better because it allows more flexibility in my decision-making. It comes with the downside that a few people decide to be a ** about it and wait until the last move to kick. But I think overall it is still the better solution because after all when that happens it's still the one being kicked who definitely did something wrong (used up too much time) and also they had the chance to speed up to get back into positive clock and not be available for being skipped anymore.

They know they can be kicked anytime. Even on the last turn (unless they get back into the positive time). They know the possibility of that to happen and yet they decide to play on (they could've just quit too btw if they don't want the risk) and did not reconcile their thinking time (by playing faster or in TB using a holiday time joker). So obviously they accepted the possibility of being skipped last turn (same logic you used). So where's the problem? In any case, it wouldn't make sense to complain when they didn't stick to the time limit they signed up for.

[tbhp]

But I think overall it is still the better solution because after all when that happens it's still the one being kicked who definitely did something wrong (used up too much time) and also they had the chance to speed up to get back into positive clock and not be available for being skipped anymore.

I find it hard to take the defense of a player who not only grabbed an unfair win, but also wasted everyone's time and gave their opponent false hope by making it look like they were going to let them play till the end.

Ultimately, it depends on whether you think the advantage is worth the inconvenience. Plus, my suggestion still allows people to kick out initially, so it's not like I'm exactly of a fan of it. But still, I find infuriating the behavior that happened to OP.

So obviously they accepted the possibility of being skipped last turn (same logic you used). So where's the problem? In any case, it wouldn't make sense to complain when they didn't stick to the time limit they signed up for.

I don't think time considerations supersede the reality of what happens in the game. And I think there's a huge difference between being forced to accept something that is fair (waiting is annoying but it doesn't have an impact on the result of the game) versus being forced to accept an unfair situation (losing a game you normally would have won if it wasn't possible to grab wins on time).

[Shivaware]

The OP originally posted a link to a tournament game, so some of the discussion here doesn't really apply, like getting your clock positive again after going negative. My general feeling was that the problem was greatly improved once tournaments had the option to prevent skipping overtime players.

There is a new wrinkle, now that some games like Heat (and Formula D that OP was playing) can continue normally after someone is skipped. It probably makes sense to immediately skip players if you somehow know they aren't coming back (or maybe they explicitly quit). On the other hand, it's better if the game completes normally, rather than reach the tournament's maximum game duration, even if some players went overtime.

In these threads, I often wish the OPs would acknowledge their role in running out of time, and that includes joining tournaments where they are not certain they can keep up. All that said, I also don't like it when someone skips someone at the last moment to avoid a loss when they could have skipped them much earlier. It's even more annoying when there was someone else whose clock was even more negative. I guess the worst situation (that didn't happen here) is when the person who does the skipping has a more negative time than the one they are skipping.

One small change that could be made is to only allow the player with the most negative time to be skipped. The suggestion is here.

[Cile]

One small change that could be made is to only allow the player with the most negative time to be skipped.

So I'm in a game with 3 other people. I'm within my time clock but every other player has exceeded their time. However, I don't happen to be on-line when it's the "most negative" player's turn so I'm stuck until the current player exceeds them?

I could see not allowing booting a player if you have also exceeded your time limit, but that could still end up in weird stuck situations where a player 1 minute over their clock is stuck with an opponent who isn't taking their turn at all.

[Shivaware]

One small change that could be made is to only allow the player with the most negative time to be skipped.

So I'm in a game with 3 other people. I'm within my time clock but every other player has exceeded their time. However, I don't happen to be on-line when it's the "most negative" player's turn so I'm stuck until the current player exceeds them?

That does sound like a valid concern. In fact, it could even arise when that player is the only one out of time. My initial thought was that it should be possible to expel an overtime person even if it is not their turn. I guess the system would schedule an expulsion and then wait until it is their turn (and they are still overtime) before actually expelling them.

I do wonder how often your situation would actually arise. How does a person get to be the "most negative", while you still have a positive amount on your clock, yet you are never online when it's their turn?