@pkyue said in #10:
> If the scenario is part of chess rules it's one thing. Here, the server made decision on players behalf and stated it was agreed upon between the players. No it's not something to feel happy about.
Perhaps this particular deviation from FIDE rules (which apply to OTB play) is justifiable.
The situation is so unusual that there is a good chance when it happens in general that something technical went wrong. Why would the play who is offered a draw let the time run out otherwise? (I have no idea what happened in your game.)
On the face of it, both players ought to be happy. As I think sheckley666 is saying in #4, both players have a result which should be satisfactory for them, which is what you'd ideally like to happen if some technical problem spoiled the game. If the FIDE rules were strictly applied, however, and the player running out of time was given a loss, that player would be aggrieved.
> If the scenario is part of chess rules it's one thing. Here, the server made decision on players behalf and stated it was agreed upon between the players. No it's not something to feel happy about.
Perhaps this particular deviation from FIDE rules (which apply to OTB play) is justifiable.
The situation is so unusual that there is a good chance when it happens in general that something technical went wrong. Why would the play who is offered a draw let the time run out otherwise? (I have no idea what happened in your game.)
On the face of it, both players ought to be happy. As I think sheckley666 is saying in #4, both players have a result which should be satisfactory for them, which is what you'd ideally like to happen if some technical problem spoiled the game. If the FIDE rules were strictly applied, however, and the player running out of time was given a loss, that player would be aggrieved.
