Calling player who intentionally runs time out scumbag

When I play a long game, I want to be able to go to the toilet or prepare a tea without worrying about pressing some button.

And I surely don't want to think about timing out when thinking about a difficult position either.

@alexkar2012 said in #9:
> I agree; sometimes taking out your frustration on something else can help. This has happened to me before but I had to leave the game to do something else.

If you know you can't make it back in time, you surely would resign and not let the time run down.

@Dragon_Emperor_9774 said in #10:
> You're right, confirmation every 1 min is somewhat annoying, but let me ask this: what's more annoying, clicking a pop-up after thinking a long time, or having to wait for whole minutes doing nothing?
I'm aware that some people here find it hard to imagine others may also play something else than blitz or bullet but do you really call thinking for more than one minute "thinking a long time"? My (lichess) record so far is a bit over 17 minutes... do you realize how disturbing would it be to have to confirm my presence 17 times while thinking about a difficult position and/or calculating some complicated lines? BtW, in the game I played this evening, only 14 out of 36 moves took me less than a minute - and I suspect that percentage was in fact higher than usual.

Maybe play 3+2 instead of 5+0 so you don't have to wait 4 minutes.

@mkubecek said in #12:
> I'm aware that some people here find it hard to imagine others may also play something else than blitz or bullet but do you really call thinking for more than one minute "thinking a long time"? My (lichess) record so far is a bit over 17 minutes... do you realize how disturbing would it be to have to confirm my presence 17 times while thinking about a difficult position and/or calculating some complicated lines? BtW, in the game I played this evening, only 14 out of 36 moves took me less than a minute - and I suspect that percentage was in fact higher than usual.
Well, is it really that hard to realize that it doesn't have to be one minute per se, but something proportional to the time control?
Or do you just conveniently omit it?
Well, obviously, for longer time controls, there should be a longer interval.
However, I believe that in a 3+0 game, if you think for more than a minute on a single move, its abnormal.
And if you're going to boot up a blitz game just to leave and make some tea, then you shouldn't be starting the game in the first place. Now, obviously, rapid is a different story, but you can kinda make it quick with a time control like 5+5.
Longer time controls (classical) are most of the time just insufferable either way, so I won't even discuss that, but for those who enjoy them, well, they obviously have a ton of free time either way, so they might as well go make their own cup of tea or whatever.
TL;DR: this is just a nitpick to stick on such a detail. Do better!

Maybe just accept that your suggestion is just not great despite all the good intentions?

Also, I think it would have quite a minimal effect on those rage sitters / rage quitters. Because actually they keep around and play the next game after sitting you out. So pressing a button every now and then will be no hurdle for them whatsoever.

It would be annoying to the vast majority of legit players, while not solving the problem at all.

It just won't work.

@Patrizsche said in #6:
> Sorry but I don't think confirming your presence every 1 minute you're thinking about a move is a good idea :)
>
> Honestly I think OP can wait 4 minutes and get over it. I understand the frustration, but OP seemed willing to invest the 4 minutes anyway (otherwise why start the game?), so to me we have to respect that the opponent may use their time however they want (could be having connection problems, could be thinking, could have been disrupted IRL by a family member or housemate or pet, etc.). It's not possible to verify that every stalling is due to being petty and not an actual reason, which is why bans after repeated offenses, not single offenses.

I do not agree on one point, OP and others are willing to invest their time, Yes.
But playing, not waiting.
I put here my personal experience, when I play I have very contingented time, waste it is a big deal because mean less relax time, and more frustration.

I can understand the disappointment of OP.
That said I also agre with you about that confirming presence in that way is not good

@Dragon_Emperor_9774 said in #14:
> Well, is it really that hard to realize that it doesn't have to be one minute per se, but something proportional to the time control?
> Or do you just conveniently omit it?
Not me. You did omit it in the first place. If you suggested a limit proportional to time control, I would still find it a bad idea but I would have discussed that proposal. As you proposed fixed one minute, I commented on that.

> However, I believe that in a 3+0 game, if you think for more than a minute on a single move, its abnormal.
And I believe something being "abnormal" doesn't mean it's wrong. Even if some people who overestimate the value of being "normal" often think so.

> Longer time controls (classical) are most of the time just insufferable either way, so I won't even discuss that, but for those who enjoy them, well, they obviously have a ton of free time either way, so they might as well go make their own cup of tea or whatever.
It's funny how many people who have no problem spending time playing series of 10-20 3+2 games every now and then but they find the very idea of playing one 30+20 or 45+45 game absurd because "it would take awful lot of time". :-)

I just want to add that this "button idea" would come handy in the opposite way.

When I was playing some training games on chess.com, we got a set up position and had to start playing. And you had to make the first move within seconds or the game would have been aborted. Pretty stupid with much of time on the clock, and being freshly handed the starting position. In that case, a button "Hey, I am actually here, do not time me out for being inactive" (which makes sense on the first move in a normal game), would have been immensely helpful.

Good point. In particular if I'm black and white plays some unusual first move, I find the 30s timeout very inconvenient. In a tournament my clock starts running after the timeout which is perfectly fair but a quick paired game would be aborted. Another case is when playing with a physical board (or an e-board) and I don't know the color in advance so that I have to turn the board first.

@mkubecek said in #19:
> Another case is when playing with a physical board (or an e-board) and I don't know the color in advance so that I have to turn the board first.

Yes, this gives a headache as well. I tend to make the move from the other side first and my second move will take some more time, or I make the moves on the screen first and then catch up on the connected board. One should know the details of the board though, to not mistakenly enter a wrong move at this point.