stop degeneration of votechess!

so 8+ votes in favour of vote-retraction! [cuendillar's vote surely counts as at least 3 !

Thats a compliment, not sarcasm!]

OK - I will play the devil's advocate to that: in all other chess "touch, move -- touch, take". Why should different apply here? If you press the "go" button wrongly and impatiently, why should you be allowed to take it back? I have not decided my opinon on this issue - but I see strong reasoning not to allow it.

 If Nigel Davies votes "go" on his side of the vote game - he doesnt get to withdraw. Why should we?

Both sides play by the same rules.  The rule exists to teach thoughfulness BEFORE moving - not ex post facto.

As for how others vote: bleaaaatttt!!!!

Economics, politics, group pressures, all were present when players began boycotting FIDE in the 70's. They were present when the break occurred, and they are present now. Eric had a vision when he established this site. The pressures stated take on a life of their own, power, prestige, control, ego, vanity, my crow is blacker than your crow.

The birth of this community was innovative. Human nature will fragment it into tribes. Petty squabbles are destroying Vote chess. DBV's, whether stupid, stubborn or just salacious, whether they do it out of ignorance or spite, have determined the extent of our segregrations. The new vote chess game is an attempt to stem the bleeding, but after mommy gives little Johnny a membership, he'll be back in. The fragmentation will continue following the ebb and flow of economics, politics, and group pressures. Chess has evolved since the 60's, unfortunately the players have not.

indeed there is only so much i can do to try and control behavior :D in can build in tools, filters, checkboxes... but when you have a large collaborative environment, people will fight and disagree. and frankly, chess.com will always be in the middle unable to please people. example: many people think that 51% should be the RESIGN number. but then there are people who want to play out the game more for learning. so who do i upset? those who want to stop the game, or those who want to play on?

sticky :(

let's vote on what % should be the RESIGN number. Wait, shouldn't we first vote for what % decides THAT vote? ....

I think that the system is fine. If you like someone suggestion DO NOT TAKE IT BLINDLY. calculate and if you want vote for it, if you disagree post why and, maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. If you don't get a reply just vote for it. If someone gives you an explanation why it's wrong, then you've just learned from your mistake.

I understand what you mean, I think. I think this goes to the question of why play vote chess and what is expected of a game. For me, the point of vote chess is to have a group of players who exchange ideas. If one player proposes a line, the other examines it and provides an explanation and series of moves that shows alternative thoughts (whether a refutation or improvement on the line). In this way several things ought to occur--everyone participates, everyone thinks, everyone learns, everyone has fun, and possibly some interesting chess is played. The vote ought to be based upon this discussion, but that doesn't mean that the players have to vote for a move that is chosen by a higher rated player. It is up to each player to choose what they think is best based  on the discussion.

This is where I think some players have difficulties with vote chess. Some people don't read the discussion or participate at all, or just read short segments of the discussion. Of course, this is their right, but by doing it this way I think the advantage, benefits of vote chess are lost. Some people read the discussion but ignore it playing along a fantasy line. Again, this is their right but for some players this is frustrating.

I've enjoyed ALL the vote chess games I've played in so far--win or lose-- even when sometimes seemingly silly mistakes or bad moves are made. For one thing, I find the interactions interesting, though sometimes people are sort of silly in their bickering--sad more than anything. For another, even if my side loses I get to see how the other side wraps it up and that's instructive. Lastly, it's not precisely me losing so, even though I don't mind losing a game, in a vote chess game I never feel even that slight disappointment of the loss.

I formed a chess team to try to see how it would be with a group of players who agreed ahead of time to act as a team, discuss the position, share thoughts, and so on before making a move. I thought it would be interesting to see if the interaction was smoother with a small group operating on a similar premise. We're starting our first game so we'll see. 

Yet I think I understand the basis of your frustration. It's not right to get upset when someone proposes a line, even a good line, even the best line, and another player disagrees, even if that player is way off. That's what a team and a vote are all about. It's the same in a democracy. I have my opinions and feel strongly about them--BUT for all I know, I'm completely wrong, so I'd be a fool to hate or be angry with the opposing side (within reason, but then there's that slippery factor what each of us believes is within reason). Tough to find a common ground and reasonableness, isn't it?

Vote chess is what it is--a messy democracy not unlike trying to write a paragraph with a committee.  The strength of the vote chess system is the opportunity to share ideas and reasoning.  If a team drives you crazy you can always just play individual games.  I would urge people to be polite to each other--it's a great opportunity for higher ranked players to share their knowledge with lower ranked players, and lower ranked players may occasionally have a fresh look at a situation that can benefit the whole group.  If players get too tied up with winning or even with playing a game that has a single coherent strategy, then vote chess is not the venue for those players.  As for voting others out of the group, I'm not sure that's a great idea, but I would suggest that all team members remind each other to be polite and respectful.  If a team player insists on being obnoxious and controlling, then the whole group can leave the game en masse and leave the one player to have a lovely time playing alone!

Sharon

Vote chess would be greatly improved by allowing team members to change their vote prior to the deadline.

 Brilliant.  I love it.

 Yes,it would.   Moreover, this can be conclusively demonstrated by organizing a vote chess game to be played between two teams. One team that is allowed to change its votes, and another team that is not permitted to do so.