@jhuang Well, that's true. You can never guess what is the quiet majority's opinion and the radical minorities are always most vocal. Nevertheless, I would still like to see my arguments countered. I spent so much energy to explain my point of view in the forums and nobody really challenged what I said. It is very sad that Lichess staff, instead of engaging in a fair debate with the community, quietly imposes their will on us. I perceived Lichess as something higher and better. It seems that I was wrong.
#AbC
It's almost as if you think that lichess mods and devs work for you. They don't. They have jobs that AREN'T lichess, they code and moderate for lichess in their free time and don't get paid a cent, and then you come out here and say all this BS attacking them for ruining it. How dare you, have some respect.
Once again, if you are getting paired against people that are way above your rating, that is a FLAW in the pairing system, not a good thing. When you verse an "Elite GM" in the lobby that is 600 points higher than you, that may make you very happy, but does the GM want to verse you? Do players 600 rating above you want to verse you? Not really.
Preventing people from exclusively versing people much higher then themselves is fixing a problem, not creating a new one. Maybe you won't be versing any elite GMs anymore, and that sucks for you, but maybe you just don't deserve to.
Also this prevents low-rated farming by setting opponents to below 1300 for example and using it to peaksit on the leaderboard without fear of losing. This new system simply mandates that one verse players close to their rating.
No one has to counter anything from you. If you don't like what lichess is doing you are free to use any other site or make your own.
An explanation isn't much to ask, surely we can agree that much.
An explanation of why someone should be able to exclude their own rating from challenges at all? Sure. If you want to play better players, prove it by beating people and increasing your own rating, not by using some sort of setting to manipulate the system.
You've gotten an explanation:
Prevent people from seeking only opponents much higher than their own rating and to prevent people from seeking opponent with ratings much lower. That's it, force players to verse people their level, which is how it should work. I don't know why you have a problem with that.
As for your "I only want players 100 above my rating", jhuang's response sums it up quite well.
@jhuang So you think it's manipulating the rating system? Well... maybe a little. I don't know. But in casual games, definitely not.
And it would be nice to have an official explanation from lichess, rather than just users guessing.
thibault is in charge of lichess.
thibault
4 days ago
#3
So sad to see you go. Have fun on the other platforms. Although they use the same rating selector Lichess now has.
lichess.org/forum/lichess-feedback/-500-or-how-to-destroy-the-greatest-chess-platform-with-one-unthoughtful-decision#3Just go to a different site, literally. There are tons of changes to lichess code base every day, doesn't mean devs post an explanation in the forums for every single change.
I agree there are frequent changes to the codebase. I don't expect an explanation for *every* change. But this is the first change that significantly negatively impacts my enjoyment of the site.
If other sites use the same selector, how does the suggestion to use another site make sense? But anyway, we shouldn't need to. Why not just give an explanation, and actually discuss things with the community? How hard is that?
Guess it's really hard when the actual devs gets flamed for trying to participate in the community, as has already happened in this very thread. sazed is a dev.
Maybe instead of demanding an explanation you should demand people behave themselves, eh?
I guess the new standard is if a change happens that claymore strongly disagrees with, a dev must give an explanation in the lichess forums?