I can understand your frustration. And it is indeed a bit arbitrarily, I admit. I thought long about giving other players a chance to get top places, and the only other way is to split the tournaments up to 2 or more skill leagues, like Lichess does with the <1300, <1500, etc tournaments. But this is unfortunately logistically too complicated for me to handle. So why not this way? It won´t be forever. Feel free to reinstall the chessbrothersbro tournaments or create a new format, then you can set the rules as you like.
If it is "appropriate" or not, is a matter of opinion, I respect your opinion. But maybe it would have been appropriate, at least ONCE to play for the Blockchain team and not your other teams. I am also in a chess club, but I preferred to play always for the Hive team.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I'm not frustrated, I'm just impressed with the way the post tags some members of the community and reproaches them. I don't find it constructive.
Okay, I can do that. But that's not my point. I said your new season is fine for non-title players to have a chance. I'm just pointing out that I don't see enough justification for selling that good idea along with a desire to punish other people.
I see. I thank you for considering me a good candidate to score a lot of points for the team. Perhaps I could have participated if someone else helped me with my work, taking on my responsibilities and plans while playing an online tournament in an online community of volunteers, that is, there was no mandatory commitment.
I don't see how you can equate the appropriateness of not participating in a league that is voluntary and had no clear prior rules or warnings about the absences of very specific people with the appropriateness of singling out some members of the community who had valid reasons for not participating and giving the impression of applying a penalty to them after the fact.