'Move Strength' - details please
-
@mistertoad @roymccoy @b-birney You will not like what I am about to say..but here goes. I think the big deal is in how seriously this is being taken by so few. I do not think there are that many perfectionists here and I think the people who can make changes are probably busy with a lot of other more important things. Give them a break. See told you you would not like what I said.
Maybe I should have just ignored this. @betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@mistertoad @roymccoy @b-birney You will not like what I am about to say..but here goes. I think the big deal is in how seriously this is being taken by so few. I do not think there are that many perfectionists here and I think the people who can make changes are probably busy with a lot of other more important things. Give them a break. See told you you would not like what I said.
Maybe I should have just ignored this. It's not that I like or don't like it. If you're using the score thermometer without informing your opponent, I just think you're cheating, that's all.
-
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@mistertoad @roymccoy @b-birney You will not like what I am about to say..but here goes. I think the big deal is in how seriously this is being taken by so few. I do not think there are that many perfectionists here and I think the people who can make changes are probably busy with a lot of other more important things. Give them a break. See told you you would not like what I said.
Maybe I should have just ignored this. It's not that I like or don't like it. If you're using the score thermometer without informing your opponent, I just think you're cheating, that's all.
@roymccoy but why? It is there for all to use. If it were a dictionary or cheat program I agree.. Hope no one takes it personally or as a judgment since we all have our own opinions ..but why would you consider it cheating to use it without informing opponents?
-
@roymccoy but why? It is there for all to use. If it were a dictionary or cheat program I agree.. Hope no one takes it personally or as a judgment since we all have our own opinions ..but why would you consider it cheating to use it without informing opponents?
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@roymccoy but why? It is there for all to use. If it were a dictionary or cheat program I agree.. Hope no one takes it personally or as a judgment since we all have our own opinions ..but why would you consider it cheating to use it without informing opponents?
I think that's the main problem: that it isn't there for all to use. I've never played on my iPhone, but checked just now in my phone browser, where the thermometer doesn't appear. Then I paid two bucks for the app and it doesn't have it either. So this situation was created by the Lexulous team, putting the tool at the disposal of some players but not others.
We could try taking "unfair" or "unfairly" out of the question. Don't you agree that you're somehow taking advantage of your opponent by using the thermometer when your opponent isn't aware of it and may not even have it?
-
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@roymccoy but why? It is there for all to use. If it were a dictionary or cheat program I agree.. Hope no one takes it personally or as a judgment since we all have our own opinions ..but why would you consider it cheating to use it without informing opponents?
I think that's the main problem: that it isn't there for all to use. I've never played on my iPhone, but checked just now in my phone browser, where the thermometer doesn't appear. Then I paid two bucks for the app and it doesn't have it either. So this situation was created by the Lexulous team, putting the tool at the disposal of some players but not others.
We could try taking "unfair" or "unfairly" out of the question. Don't you agree that you're somehow taking advantage of your opponent by using the thermometer when your opponent isn't aware of it and may not even have it?
@roymccoy no, that would mean asking if the opponent has it and if they use it etc..would take up more time than playing. I used to ask if they click on it what they see then leave it up to them. Never had anyone say they cant see it.. more often comments like cool or I did not know
-
@roymccoy no, that would mean asking if the opponent has it and if they use it etc..would take up more time than playing. I used to ask if they click on it what they see then leave it up to them. Never had anyone say they cant see it.. more often comments like cool or I did not know
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
no, that would mean asking if the opponent has it and if they use it etc..would take up more time than playing.
If I had ever heard any other excuses for cheating (I don't remember any), this would certainly be the weakest.
-
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
no, that would mean asking if the opponent has it and if they use it etc..would take up more time than playing.
If I had ever heard any other excuses for cheating (I don't remember any), this would certainly be the weakest.
@roymccoy not about cheating at all. speaking for myself my anagrammer is in my head I do not need cheat programs. tried them at various times and none helpful except the brain anagrammer
For me when I am in the mood it is strictly trying to beat the best score . it is that simple -
@roymccoy not about cheating at all. speaking for myself my anagrammer is in my head I do not need cheat programs. tried them at various times and none helpful except the brain anagrammer
For me when I am in the mood it is strictly trying to beat the best score . it is that simple@betterlate1-0
You can say anything you want, you're still a cheater. -
@mistertoad said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
I think it IS a 'big deal' - it's a bug in the software which is misleading.
Please, Lexulous, check this problem out!
I think you're being unreasonable, and I assume @ThatGuyThere202 agrees. To mention chess again, it's as if you were demanding that a 1950s chess engine be able not only to beat the top grandmasters, but to make the perfect move every time.
As my grandmother would say, "Blessed is he who expecteth nothing, for he shall not be disappointed." And I don't think there's much reason to be disappointed with the score thermometer, which works well enough when it's not broken and going up and down like it was again yesterday (and still today, I just now notice – grr-r). One of the things they could do is fix the bug that causes this recurring misfunction. And if they aren't going to do that (or other reasonable and often simple things that have been proposed to them), they aren't going to painstakingly hone their max-score module either. Don't get me wrong: I agree that something should be done. But I say just change its name and/or visibly document that it isn't precisely perfect, which would be quick and easy. It just now occurs to me that adding "estimated" to the thermometer's pop-up would do it: "Estimated score strength" or "Estimated % of max possible", for example (I prefer the first, but not "Estimated move strength"). But one apparently can't expect even this from the Lexulous team, let alone perfection in regard to the max score.
Please understand that, when I wrote about a 'bug in the software' being a 'big deal', I was replying to b-birney about a specific issue that he posted about (the letter 's').
I did not mention chess when making that specific 'Feature Request' nor did I make any demands.
I agree with you that the 'recurring misfunction' you mention should be fixed. It appears to be an unpredictable bug which are, of course the hardest to fix eg a bug caused by some adblocking software of which the programmer is unaware.
-
@betterlate1-0
You can say anything you want, you're still a cheater.@roymccoy whatever you say. As long as I know I am not..no matter what you think. My suggestion is learn new words or close your anagrammar. Happy Holidays. If that is how you can make it all better..happy name calling to you
-
@mistertoad @roymccoy @b-birney You will not like what I am about to say..but here goes. I think the big deal is in how seriously this is being taken by so few. I do not think there are that many perfectionists here and I think the people who can make changes are probably busy with a lot of other more important things. Give them a break. See told you you would not like what I said.
Maybe I should have just ignored this. I think the big deal is in how seriously this is being taken by so few
I don't see why we shouldn't be serious about issues such as the occasional unavailablity of 'Move Strength' (see roymccoy's post) or whether it is, or isn't, cheating.
Give them a break
Of course, yes! And in any case, as I said in another post here, some bugs are unpredictable - which makes them very difficult to fix.
-
@roymccoy whatever you say. As long as I know I am not..no matter what you think. My suggestion is learn new words or close your anagrammar. Happy Holidays. If that is how you can make it all better..happy name calling to you
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
whatever you say.
Okay, I say you're either a psychopathic cheater, a very unintelligent one, or both.
My suggestion is learn new words or close your anagrammar.
You might learn how to spell "anagrammer" yourself, though I see there's a book titled Anagrammar that might interest people here. See https://www.amazon.com/Anagrammar-1-Joe-Edley/dp/1479299715.
-
Please understand that, when I wrote about a 'bug in the software' being a 'big deal', I was replying to b-birney about a specific issue that he posted about (the letter 's').
I did not mention chess when making that specific 'Feature Request' nor did I make any demands.
I agree with you that the 'recurring misfunction' you mention should be fixed. It appears to be an unpredictable bug which are, of course the hardest to fix eg a bug caused by some adblocking software of which the programmer is unaware.
-
Please understand that, when I wrote about a 'bug in the software' being a 'big deal', I was replying to b-birney about a specific issue that he posted about (the letter 's').
I did not mention chess when making that specific 'Feature Request' nor did I make any demands.
I agree with you that the 'recurring misfunction' you mention should be fixed. It appears to be an unpredictable bug which are, of course the hardest to fix eg a bug caused by some adblocking software of which the programmer is unaware.
@mistertoad said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
Please understand that, when I wrote about a 'bug in the software' being a 'big deal', I was replying to b-birney about a specific issue that he posted about (the letter 's').
I'm not sure I misunderstood you. The "S" issue was that the singular of a word had been shown as 100%, whereas if you added the S you'd have a higher score and so the 100% indication was false. Right? If so, I really don't think that particular issue was a big deal. I take the "give them a break" attitude on this one.
I did not mention chess when making that specific 'Feature Request' nor did I make any demands.
Sorry. I didn't mean to say that you'd mentioned chess, though I can now see how "To mention chess again" could be so understood in that sentence. Also, I was using "demanding" loosely.
I agree with you that the 'recurring misfunction' you mention should be fixed. It appears to be an unpredictable bug which are, of course the hardest to fix eg a bug caused by some adblocking software of which the programmer is unaware.
I doubt that it's anyone's ad-blocking software, since when it's screwed up it's screwed up for everybody. The programmer is generally going to be unaware of the source of a bug when he first encounters and tries to deal with it, but regardless of the difficulty he should eventually figure out what the problem is and correct or somehow avoid it. We're still waiting for that in this case.
-
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
whatever you say.
Okay, I say you're either a psychopathic cheater, a very unintelligent one, or both.
My suggestion is learn new words or close your anagrammar.
You might learn how to spell "anagrammer" yourself, though I see there's a book titled Anagrammar that might interest people here. See https://www.amazon.com/Anagrammar-1-Joe-Edley/dp/1479299715.
@roymccoy what makes you so angry? That I can spell? Have to wonder about someone as angry as you are. Done responding ..as I often say as long as I know I do not cheat that is what counts. I am sorry you are so intimated by someone that can spell. Happy Holidays. Done responding to you now
-
@roymccoy what makes you so angry? That I can spell? Have to wonder about someone as angry as you are. Done responding ..as I often say as long as I know I do not cheat that is what counts. I am sorry you are so intimated by someone that can spell. Happy Holidays. Done responding to you now
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@roymccoy what makes you so angry?
LOL. What a lousy read.
That I can spell?
Your misspelling of "anagrammer" has nothing to do with this.
Have to wonder about someone as angry as you are.
Okay, do that.
Done responding ..as I often say as long as I know I do not cheat that is what counts.
That's what all the psychopathic cheats say.
What I finally seem to have figured out here is that you're defining cheating strictly as using an anagram dictionary or a solver. If that defines cheating, you're good. But if cheating is understood generally as taking unfair advantage of someone, you're cheating.
I am sorry you are so intimated by someone that can spell.
No, what really intimates me is someone that doesn't know the difference between "intimate" and "intimidate".
Happy Holidays. Done responding to you now
Good – I always enjoy having the last word!
-
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@roymccoy what makes you so angry?
LOL. What a lousy read.
That I can spell?
Your misspelling of "anagrammer" has nothing to do with this.
Have to wonder about someone as angry as you are.
Okay, do that.
Done responding ..as I often say as long as I know I do not cheat that is what counts.
That's what all the psychopathic cheats say.
What I finally seem to have figured out here is that you're defining cheating strictly as using an anagram dictionary or a solver. If that defines cheating, you're good. But if cheating is understood generally as taking unfair advantage of someone, you're cheating.
I am sorry you are so intimated by someone that can spell.
No, what really intimates me is someone that doesn't know the difference between "intimate" and "intimidate".
Happy Holidays. Done responding to you now
Good – I always enjoy having the last word!
@roymccoy intimidated. .auto correct not me, but gave me a big laugh
-
@roymccoy intimidated. .auto correct not me, but gave me a big laugh
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@roymccoy intimidated. .auto correct not me, but gave me a big laugh
Quick thinking.
-
@betterlate1-0 said in 'Move Strength' - details please:
@roymccoy intimidated. .auto correct not me, but gave me a big laugh
Quick thinking.
@roymccoy It is sad you do not realize I do not need quick thinking just facts. You assume that I cheat, now you assume it was a quick thought. Nowhere to you realize it is just truth. I am sorry for you and happy holidays. Your thoughts are your own. Enjoy them
-
@roymccoy It is sad you do not realize I do not need quick thinking just facts. You assume that I cheat, now you assume it was a quick thought. Nowhere to you realize it is just truth. I am sorry for you and happy holidays. Your thoughts are your own. Enjoy them
You assume that I cheat,
I don't assume you cheat – you announce it in public.
Nowhere to you realize it is just truth.
You got a weird .auto correct.
-
You assume that I cheat,
I don't assume you cheat – you announce it in public.
Nowhere to you realize it is just truth.
You got a weird .auto correct.
@roymccoy you assume. I say I use my anagrammer..my brain
