Where have all the players gone?

[sdr46]

What happened to all the players at this site? I get a feeling that they are leaving by the droves.

There are tournaments waiting years to fill up (some never do), many of the old familiar faces no longer show up, and I don't see too many new players in the tournaments that are struggling to start.

Are we just spiraling down to oblivion? Is everyone just moving on to other sites that seem to have more new features, tournaments, players?

Will the last person here please turn off the lights!

Sdr46

[ZorMaster]

Yes it is a very pity. I talked it several times over with PatzerBernie and we both think they leave because so many other chess sites were 'born'. I stay here because i made nice chess friends and i love the site and his owner who is doing a good job.
I shall make some advertising during otb games.

[reyn]

Sheldon,

Yes to all the points that you've made, and I know Stan is fully aware of all the implications of them.

Unfortunately, one of the problems (Stan can correct me if I'm off-base here) is that much time has been spent on the never-seemingly-ending New Rating System project. It's been over 3 years in the making.

This is not a criticism, and Stan knows and regrets himself not having focused that time more on features that would bring in more subscription money. The situation now, in my opinion, is that many former subscribers have let their subscriptions lapse for quite some time. Some are still here, but some have left. Many players have never taken up one.

This has created a dilemma for the site. Without a decent amount of subscription money coming in, server costs are hard to pay for. In order for some to decide to subscribe, more features need to be built in to attract more people. This all takes a lot of time.

Imagine yourself in Stan's shoes for a minute. You've built up this site from scratch since 1998, working a full time job at the same time. You pay for 100% of the costs until 2001, when subscriptions started. You hope to build it up slowly year by year, putting a lot of time and energy into something you care a lot about. You try to make the best decisions you can. There will always be some that disagree with them. Time goes by, subscriptions and interest peak, and year by year start to decline. You find you have to subsidize a bit more and more, again out of your own pocket. Credit due to Stan for hanging in there, trying to make a go of things. I imagine it to be rather discouraging.

What needs to be done? Well, some new features for sure, but the problem goes deeper than that. If one looks at a major competitive correspondence site and compare, there's a whole lot you miss out on by not being a subscriber. Also, many restrictions on what you can do without a subscription, one of the main features being the number of games one can play simultaneously.

Now, there really have been no restrictions here on this site, so implementing some will likely have some implications for everybody, at least in the short run. No doubt more will leave the site, leaving less people to have as opponents for others to play games with, but, in my opinion, some basic ones will need to be put in place for the site's future health.

Here are some points to ponder. There is currently some stiff competition for the correspondence chess market. Will new features here convince current players to stay and take up a subscription? Will it bring new players here, or bring old ones back? Will it encourage others to leave the site they're are on now for here? All difficult to answer for sure.

Real world stores open and close all the time. The internet is no different.

Experience here has already taught us that when the site is in trouble, others will not help out by at least taking a 3 month subscription once in a while. It would make all the difference, but people are indifferent. They keep thinking that there will be another "free site" that they can jump to if this one closes. Well, if you think that, you haven't checked around. The days of the "free sites" are numbered.

[yitwail]

all this discussion of other sites makes me wonder what i'm missing? i know there's a couple of things about stans that annoys me: slow play by an opponent who claimed to be willing to make several or many moves a day, and players who refuse challenges & don't even give a reason. i'm a little saddened to find that most of the games i've played here are now *archived*--the pgn files exist so the game can be replayed, but all the comments are gone.

as to the tournament situation, i only sign up for the ones that have a reasonable chance to start, because there's only a few seats left. i think tourneys might fill up faster if the rules for entry were less restrictive--let in new players, and allow players of different strengths to participate.

if stans goes under, it won't be because of me: i subscribe, accept all challenges, and have never forfeited or even used vacation days, although i haven't challenged anyone recently because i'm preoccupied with other things besides chess right now.

[Blockhead]

yitwail said:

i'm a little saddened to find that most of the games i've played here are now *archived*--the pgn files exist so the game can be replayed, but all the comments are gone.

I agree. The game comments are an important part of the game as far as I'm concerned.
Have you deleted them all Stan, or are they compressed in the archive server deep freeze?
Any chance of resurrecting them?
Some notice of your intention to do this would have been welcome.

[Stan Steliga]

I'm sorry, but they are gone. When I moved to the new server I had 20 million moves to bring over. The only way I could do that was to archive the games that had been completed more than 60 days prior to the move over to the new server. I have always had the concept of the archived games. Since 2001 the first 5,000 games at the site had been archived. Archived games are stoed in PGN format. I figured at least having the moves of the games was better than losing them all together.

Sorry I didn't give you guys a heads-up about the archiving, but I don't know what you could have done even if you had warning. Moving all of the comments with the 20 million moves really was not an option.

[Blockhead]

Thanks for that Stan
I would like to have been warned. Had I known in good time I would have C&P the game comments and saved/archived to my HD.
Am I right in thinking that all my games 60 days plus old will have their comments stripped off before storing as pgn?

[Stan Steliga]

Yes - that's right - the next time I run a big archive, the comments will be lost. I don't know when I will do the next archive. I didn't archive any games for about 7 years before that last archive, so it might be a while. As long as I have the disk space for it I want to keep the stuff for everyone.

I should know this, but I wonder if comments can be stored in a PGN? Maybe I will look into that and make it so that the comments are saved in the PGN when subscribers games are archived.

[Blockhead]

Thanks Stan
Yes storing comments embedded in the pgn sounds hopeful.
Please keep us posted.
It would be very welcome if you could give us say 7 days notice before you make another game archive.

[UMSL]

Hey guys! I'm glad this place is still up! This is an alright place. I haven't checked out anyother correspondence sites yet because I have this one. I hope I won't have to either.

So what is the difference between free-chess and actually signing up? The bigest reason why I haven't is because of a fear of puting money in over the net (maybe). I have no credit card, so a cheque (which I don't have either) in the mail may have to suffice. I'm not entirely up to sending money in snail-mail either.

Anyways, to the point. I think that another real problem is that not many people play chess anymore. People are all caught up in the latest, fast-pace video game if anything. Can't really compete with that much. Not saying that there aren't any people who won't play chess, but the number's are dwindling.

I think (ya, my UN-biased [riiight] opinion) that the best thing would be to advertise this site. Simple advertising for the start anyway. Like a animated gif or something. Then slowly (yet surely) restrict the freedom of the free-bies. If I remeber correctly, it's not expensive to sign up. And I know it takes a lot of time to get things done. I'm an admin on a forum that just started up in Sept. and it's difficult to set it up to our preferences. Takes a lot of slow, diligent work.

These are only helpful sugestions (hopefully). You don't have to do anything I suggest at all. I just don't want to see a well setup site, fall under to a new site that has no experience and has a lot of 'bugs' in it. One of the big things this chess site ahs it going for it, is it's age and how well it's worked (hint hint). Most of the bugs have been worked out of this place (other than lag of members it seems), and easy to use. Simple yet not bland at all. Sure, make overs may be needed according to the way the age of tech seems to be going, but this site works very easily without flash, java, etc. problems. It's well established.

I'll stop now. I think I've got my point across. Remember, what I've suggested are my suggestions and hold no sway to them. Please answer my questions at the top, so I will know from someone who is actually signed up.

Thanks for a great site guys! This place is worth it!
God Bless
UMSL

[Stan Steliga]

Right now the difference between Free and Subscription is this... Subscribers get these additional features:
- Create and/or play in Site Tourneys. Various Tourney and League formats are available.
- Subscriber Control Panel that brings everything together in one page for you
- Private Game Notes can be kept with each game
- Subscriber-only Challenge Central lets you create challenges that only subscribers can accept.
- Personal Message Center at your Player Page allows others at the site to communicate with you.

I'm hoping to add more subscriber-only features. I'm never going to get rich from this site, but I do need the subscriptions to pay for the hosting. I have put in thousands of hours of work into creating, maintaining and supporting the site over the last 9+ years.

There is a link to your "Subscription Manager" page at your Player Page. You can see details of why to subscribe and different methods to subscribe (Credit Card, Check...)

Thanks for your comments.

[fotaq]

I subscribe to the site, but not really for the features it unlocks, but because I believe in actively supporting the hard work it takes to run such a site.
I have played on other sites for free where you can only play a certain number of games, or even a limited number of moves in one day, which is very frustrating.
I would like to think that everyone over 18 with the means to do so, would subscribe especially considering how cheap it is, but I guess when people can get something for nothing, making a small financial contribution isn't their overriding concern

[Blockhead]

Over and above the useful suggestions made above, I think each of us who subscribe to SNC, and find ourselves playing a non-subscriber, should, whenever possible, gently raise the issue and point out some of the advantages that come with subscribing.

On that note - the perks associated with subscription - I am particularly looking forward to hearing more from savin regarding his player openings analysis project he started some time ago.

[UMSL]

I agree with BH and fotaq, even though I'm not signed up (yet), places like these should definatly be held-up financially.

As fotaq said, when I get the means, I'm signed up.

[dim7th]

I have been delighted with the service Stan provides. Many players at Stan's are now my friends and I have experienced many excellent games, good sportmanship and comraderie. I think my chess has improved by playing here. Please keep it going Stan. I am grateful to you.