I sent a draw offer in one of my games, and then got a message that my opponent had sent me a draw offer... but when I looked at the game, there was no draw offer. Did my offer get sent to me instead of my opponent? The game is obviously a draw, but I'm not sure if my opponent got my message or not.

suentun: If you mean this game, it says "no vacation days" in the time control 

how can my time ran out when i have some vacation days left and use automatic vacation?

speachless: Thanks, that will work.

Bluefin: hi bluefin, i have tried it out and if you block someone, he will not be able to see your new games waiting for opponents. but if you open a tournament, you need also to ban him from tournaments you open, both links for doing it are in the players profile that you want to block...

I want to keep the games I currently have with this person.

If you block someone, Can they see your posted
games ?

thisbeme: "Some games don't end if you can't move, you have to pass! e.g. Lines of Action/backgammon/Ludo"

And if the rules claimed those games used "standard CHESS rules", your point might actually be relevant.

Stalemate is in fact quite common in chess. It's the most common cause of draw with the exception of agreement to draw between the players. There are entire books written on how to cause stalemate and how to avoid it. It's a basic rule of the game.

thisbeme: It's stalemate because you moved your queen into a position where the king cannot move.

That is a basic rule of chess that's been around since .. well, along, long time. Before I started playing over 30 years ago.

You messed up, stop complaining about it, learn and don't make the mistake again.

The rule say this is how to finish the game ends and that condition isn't met.

HOW many times has stalemate happened???
It is obvious a very unlike occurence given the nature of the game!

Maybe the person who wrote that rule isn't "smart enough" to realise that stalemate is a possible outcome :P

Something may seem common sense, but someone had a go at me for not knowing that linetris wasn't connect 4 and told me to read the rules.

The phrase "how to finish the game" is very clear in meaning and creates the assumption that that all finishing scenario will be covered under the clause! Ask any competent lawyer to look at those rule and they should see that there is a problem, if you tell them that these rules adequately cover the stalemate possibility accurately!

Stalemate should be arguably not permitted like is the case with check or the game end in a paradox, as one player has no legal move and the so called end conditions are not met.

How can a game that hasn't met the finish condition be over?

thisbeme: Your fault dude. Everybody else is smart enough to know it without any amendments.

Some games don't end if you can't move, you have to pass! e.g. Lines of Action/backgammon/Ludo

The rules mention "How to finish the game" and it is an omission to not mention the possibility of stalemate.

It is reasonable to expect the game is not finished when the conditions are not met?

Since check is forbidden, why assume stalemate is the same when there is a section on how the game end that could include stalemate and doesn't mention stalemate?

The rules need amending, had the rule been clear I would have played another move!

thisbeme: Rules don't mention the knight moves in L and the bishop in diagonal. They just state "standard chess rules to move".

"the game is finished..." if stalemate is consider to end the game it should be mentioned, it was not probably by accident because it was not considered by the games creator/author of the rule on this site.
The game should not end if you haven't fulfilled the "finishing conditions!"

"The game is finished if one player moves own king to the last row. However, when white moves his king to the last row, and black moves directly after that also his king to the last row, the game is a draw, in order to compensate white player's advantage of making the first move."

Racing Kings (wasa vs. thisbeme) ended with stalemate which is logical but not mention in the rules!!

Bernice: That's why Fencer's "Ban from signing up" feature is so useful. That and three days per move tourneys.

Artful Dodger: yep....those do make ya go GGRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Just finished a 4 person tourney that took a year and a half. That sucks.

ketchuplover:  probably more than you can dish out.. He has awards for the one with the most moves.. and you pretty much have to consistantly move the entire 24 hours with no thoughts.. hope you can hold going to the potty! ;)

moves per day can the site handle? tia

(V): Unlikely. I suggest to use a "normal" free photo service.

Any chance the photo size limit could be increased? I know the transfer system can take upto 1MB.. at least what I've read suggests so.

Rabbits2: CHeck now. Admin checks all changes. I just accepted your change.

Rabbits2: When you say "just changed my email", what do you mean by "just"?

There are some things here at BK that update immediately, some thing seem to update a few times a day or so, and some things update once a day.

And that doesn't count the times when BK needs a reboot because some things aren't updating when they normally would....

I just changed my email and it still shows Rabbits2@webtv.net and not the new email

100kilobytes

What's the max file size that can be uploaded to a photo album?

for the site's upcoming 10th anniversary? tia

ketchuplover: Not sure what you mean? When I transfer money, it goes into Fencer's personal account. Nobody gets anything of it. (I have no idea what he does with it, though)
If you use PayPal, they take their share as with everything going through them. I don't know the percentage (as they don't want me as a customer), but it can't be so bad.

of the membership money goes to the site-as opposed to the money handlers. tia

Fencer: That's what I thought. But it's always better to check...

El Cid: A small bug, perhaps. Nothing serious. I would ignore it.

I just received (at 9AM) a message saying I'm the winner of a tournament, with the text "you are the winner of this tournament". However it does not say which tournament. Moreover, yesterday I had 31 running tournaments and today I have... 31 running tournaments (I don't remember starting any new one). Is this a "spam" message, a bug, etc.?

aaru: The script is executed once a day on 00:01 but it was stuck for some reason. Such things happen.

Everything ok -> Yesterday's most active player: ann67 (2651 moves) (more ...)

Should be: stefanmallo 2366

Yesterday's most active player: null (0 moves) (more ...)

rod03801: thx a lot rod03801...it's really interesting that other refer the same problem. but not all users or boards seams to be affected, this makes it tricky for the support...

thx, i will have a look on your link

speachless: As someone else said, I think this is something new. As though the image recently disappeared. I haven't noticed it up until now. But I know I'll be looking more carefully on my few current plakato games.

It is being discussed further on the Backgammon discussion board.
http://brainking.com/en/Board?bc=26

thisbeme: me i even didn't had to switch to small board size, cause it already was, but anyway the graphic is missing, this is what irritates me so much... but anyway, i don't think filip fencer will care, it seams to me he didn't take it for serious cause he's convinced i just need to switch to the small board size.... what already is! i think i will just stop playing plakoto...

thisbeme: The bug is really only the graphics, not the play.
Instead of showing the picture of a black piece pinning a white piece, because that image is missing, it shows nothing or just the white piece.
I'm not saying this makes it any better, it is clearly unplayable.
Just understand that the issue is solely the missing images.

For years I said that plakoto had a bug and was told there was "not a bug!"
Nobody told me to switch the setting.

It seems that the small board does display the game so you know which piece is covered and which is doing the the covering. Small board does look really ugly btw. Large board still has the same bug of hiding the pieces and not showing which piece is covered and by how many (unless fixed while my post was written)! Only trial and error or playing through the game history would tell you what is going on!
Why the big board doesn't function as the small board is annoying I wasted a lot of time using trial and error to work out what going on!

Fencer: thx fencer for checking, you just need to click on the plakoto games with your own settings to SMALL-sized board and you'll see the same as I do...

pedestrian: thx pedestrian for checking on your games too, i saw only now your post :-)

i will keep the running plakotos that shows the same problem OPENED as long as I can...

pedestrian: If there is a problem, I will look at it when I have time. Finding a bug in a game model that was taken as "working" for 4 years is not easy.

Fencer: Let me try again: Now there is also a problem with the smaller set. It must be recent, speachless was the first one to notice. But it's in my games too.

Fencer: clear thx Fencer.... but my game settings are set already to small... so anyway, I see you can't or want help... so thx for your precious time and i will follow your hint and go to the backgammon forum...

thx again

speachless: Some graphics is missing in the bigger set but the small one should be OK, as far as I know. How would people play Plakoto, anyway? From time to time I receive a question why some pieces are missing on the board but when I suggest to switch to the small set, everybody responds that the problem was solved. So I take it for granted.

pedestrian: thx a lot pedestrian for your support