LSS is the worst Corr server


Back to forum

Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-21)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I previously erroneously had this as a sidebar chat.

I will post the story here.

I had 22 games running on LSS. All of a sudden a game disappeared. I checked and found the administrator had decided to resign for me in a game where I had a cleanly winning position and 43 days on my clock. I contacted the administrator politely to inquire why he had done this. He answered rudely explaining that he did not care about my problem. After his uncalled for rudeness, I explained to him I was no longer interested in playing further games on this "joke of a server" so please remove me from a tournament that was about to start. He responded with pure insults and a memberships suspension but *did not* remove me from that tournament. When the new tournament started, I explained to him again that he was supposed to have removed me. I was only interested in finishing my current games out of respect for my opponents. The administrator then went and forfeited all currently running 19 games and placed a ban on me playing there again until 2013. I told him that was disrespectful not just to me but to my opponents as well. He then deleted my account entirely (which doesn't bother me as I would have asked for this after my 19 games finished). There you have it... Ortwin Paetzold - the bat shit crazy administrator.

Scott Nichols    (2012-04-21 17:34:46)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I have decided to quit offering my opinion here, but this one I will answer. I was very surprised by this, as I have many games on LSS and have had some limited dealings with Dr. Paetzold and they have always been prompt and courteous. LSS offers a wide variety of tournaments including my favorite, 10 days with 1 day per move increment. This is much more my style, I have tried too many times to get something like that here, but to avail. I have just renewed my membership for five years on LSS. The only thing I'm sorry about Daniel is that we had a recent draw on there, but if I had waited a little longer, obviously I would have got the full point.

Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-21 17:38:32)
LSS is the worst Corr server

"The only thing I'm sorry about Daniel is that we had a recent draw on there, but if I had waited a little longer, obviously I would have got the full point."

Wow Scott... I am appalled to speechless.... I guess it really is time for me to quit chess.

Thibault de Vassal    (2012-04-21 17:57:05)

Well, as I said in the chat I'm really surprised by all this... I also had prompt and courteous conversations with Ortwin (years ago) so I recommended Daniel to post in LSS forum to try to know why this winning game was suddenly adjudicated.

Daniel, were you discussing with your opponent during the game? Maybe he reported some messages (rules are probably different on this issue)!?

I hope we'll know more about this.

Don Groves    (2012-04-21 21:18:56)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I am wondering why this was posted here. It does not concern FICGS at all. The LSS server would seem to be a more appropriate venue for comppaints about its service.

Garvin Gray    (2012-04-22 04:23:22)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I agree with Don Groves.

Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-22 06:50:06)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I was not discussing with my opponent. I feel like corr issues in general are something the corr community should be aware of so I do not share Garvin or Don's opinion. I obviously can't post this on lss forums as I have been banned there. Clearly, posting on forums of a site that is so wildly out of control is a waste of one's time and breath anyways.
Frankly, I am most ashamed of Scott's response above all else. His only problem with 20 games being forfeited is that it wasn't 21 so he could claim an illegitimate win as well - disgusting. Frankly the more I see of the correspondence chess world the more inclined I am to leave it permanently behind.

Garvin Gray    (2012-04-22 07:04:40)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I had taken Scott's last comment very much in gest and was not to be taken seriously.

Scott, an emoticon or smiley would have helped there.

Scott Nichols    (2012-04-22 15:07:53)
LSS is the worst Corr server

Yes Garvin, I thought about that after, should have put the smiley, because that is how it was intended.

Thibault de Vassal    (2012-04-22 18:49:49)
Answer from Ortwin

Well, here is the answer from Dr. Ortwin Paetzold (LSS/IECG) that he asked me to post here. I'm glad to do it of course so that we can hear from both sides and make our own opinion with:


Daniel Parmet is twisting the reality a bit. I take the right to quote my full answers, however as I do not have the permission to do so, I will not post the notes from Daniel to me, unless he quoted it here himself already.

Fact 1 is that Daniel has not read the rules of LSS or forgot about them. There is a function in LSS which lets the webmaster check this esp. in case of rule questions. Therefore he might not have known about the rule, however, when registering on LSS each player is asked to study the rules and to play according to them. I am sure, the same holds for FICGS and any other server.

Fact 2 is that on 4th April Daniel Parmet has lost a game on time by violating the 30-days-rule. The server automatically stopped the game and awarded the point to the opponent, independent from the position. The server also imposed the two week suspension to start a new tournament. The 30-days-rule was installed at IECG more than 10 years ago and I had included it into LSS right from the beginning. Daniel Parmet asked politely why the admin has cancelled his game (which I had not).

Fact 3 is that in my answer about the query why the game was finished, I have answered with reference to the rules:

“Your game was forfeited, because you did not move for 30 days. This is the maximum number of days to be used per individual move, independent of the total amount of time you have left. See the Rules and Usage Section under "Violation of Time Control". This is also the reason of your two-week-suspension. “

In his response Daniel Parmet called the LSS “a joke of a site”.

Fact 4 is that I answered to this insultation:

“Well, it is not my fault that you have not read the rules during the past five years you have played here! To be honest, this is impressing!”

I do not think this is more rude than insulting me/LSS because one has made a mistake!

Fact 5 is that I did not remove him from the waiting list of the LSS Anniversary 2012 as requested, because I thought that – once Daniel thinks reasonably about the case – he might want to continue, esp. as he wanted to continue all other games. Furthermore LSS has a feature where each player can remove himself from the waitinglist of this tournament. This all happened on 5th April! I then forgot about the matter.

Fact 6 is that on 19th April the LSS Anniverary groups were created including Daniel Parmet to one of the groups. As he was no longer suspended that time I missed that he still was on the waitinglist. I would otherwise have tried to get a replacement, which I did in other cases . When he claimed not to play in the anniversary on 20th April, I decided to remove him from all tournaments he was playing. As the tournaments were in an early stage (start date 15th Feb, Parmet finished only 3/10 and 1/12 games in them), I believe it makes less impact to withdraw a player then letting him influence the outcome, esp. as e.g. he would not use a potential qualification to the LSS WC Semi-Final or the Consolation Finals. I commented that action with the following message:

‘I have withdrawn you from this "joke of a site" (your own - wrong - words. It is not my fault that you have not read the rules!)

Thanks for playing here.’

The answer was unfriendly so I decided to cancel the membership permanently.

I would like to thank Thibault for the opportunity to express my view. I do not intend to comment anyfurther in this matter, as I think the two different versions are speaking for themselves.

George Clement    (2012-04-22 19:19:23)
LSS Move Rule

" violating the 30-days-rule. The server automatically stopped the game and awarded the point to the opponent, independent from the position. The server also imposed the two week suspension to start a new tournament. The 30-days-rule was installed at IECG more than 10 years ago and I had included it into LSS right from the beginning."

I like the idea behind this rule on LSS, IMHO it would solve some of the slow entry problems by making players move faster, which is a big part of the entry problem. I think anyone can make a least 1 move in 10 days, using todays hardware/software and communications. What do you think fellow members? I have no problem with players using time off thier clock but why wait 30 days make 10 moves then wait another 30 days?

Scott Nichols    (2012-04-22 19:23:45)
LSS Move Rule

Exactly! I was going to say this same thing. Sometimes when a player decides to just quit playing, or whatever the reason, and they have 60-100 days on their clock, it takes THAT LONG to finally resolve the game. A "30-days" rule would be a big step in the right direction IMO. I think Thib has a "60-days" rule if I'm not mistaken though.

Scott Nichols    (2012-04-22 19:37:17)
LSS Move Rule

P.S. Game #57387 of mine is a great example of a frustrating game. It is a dead drawn position, but it could be played out for a long time. He can conceivably keep this going for another year getting 40 days for every 10 moves. It has been "40 DAYS" since his last move.

Thibault de Vassal    (2012-04-22 19:41:26)
LSS move rule

I agree that such a rule would speed up many games, but it would be quite hard for many players & we may lose a a few ones, by accident or not... IMO rapid time control is fast enough (our 60 days rule does not really apply there) while standard time control suits for the others, the only problem is to have players enough to change the rating bands.

Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-22 19:43:08)
LSS is the worst Corr server

FICGS already has a rule like that in that its every 60 days here which is far more reasonable. And I have used that to great effect to beat a strong player it required 49 days of analyzing some tough lines to win. If at 30 days, I was forced to move, it would have been a draw.

Mr. Ortwin forgets to mention I didn't violate this rule. But then Ortwin has shown himself to be a very unreasonable character.

Daniel Parmet    (2012-04-22 19:59:50)
LSS is the worst Corr server

In general, I could make many points to Ortwin's diminutive response. However, his lying aside - he has admitted to his disgusting actions and given specious reasoning for it. At this point, I think its best to let the topic drop. Others know LSS is not a safe place to play now and that was my only point. It is clear there can never be any proper resolution in my case personally.

On to the topic of the 60 day rule which is the real reason for my response. I think many people are forgetting that not everyone is retired with little to do with their time but chess. Many of us work and/or go to school. And when you have a complicated position, it is very very unreasonable to expect a response in 10 days time out of someone that works 80 hour weeks. I recognize that most of my opponents these days respond within 24 hours or less no matter what the move or how complicated the position... but this is because I am playing in general a lower caliber of player that just blindly follows the computer. I have the privilege of knowing GM Tansel Turgut and he tells me he never plays more than 10 games at once and generally doesn't make a move before 25 days of thought. I would others to stop for a moment and consider that not *everyone* is like you. They have other demands on their time and other analysis methods.

Thibault de Vassal    (2012-04-22 20:42:15)
LSS move rule

@ Scott : Definitely I don't agree with you on this point :) Finishing such a game that lasts near the end has no consequence or so few on the whole thing (including your rating that is calculated every 60 days), and theorically having a 60 days, 30 days or even 10 days move rule does not change anything to the fact that a player who wants to last a correspondence chess game can do it the same way, for the same duration... The main reason to the 60 days rule is that we are humans, with humans problems and that shouldn't (or as few as possible) interfer with our games.

Scott Nichols    (2012-04-22 21:41:55)
LSS is the worst Corr server

@ Thib: I see your point and have to agree also, I have a problem of being too impatient sometimes. I'm working on it, :)

Scott Nichols    (2012-04-22 21:53:16)
LSS is the worst Corr server

P.S. What if I were in an accident or some family emergency and COULDN'T answer for 40 days. I see the light. Different sites offer different things, this site is still one of my favorites, :)

Sebastian Boehme    (2012-04-23 10:36:38)
LSS is the worst Corr server

I do definitely like this point as well and yes I am also a slow player in general, but that is not because I like slow-food, it is because I am a busy soul.
It is nice that these aspects are taken care of on so many corr chess sites.