paul211 wrote:
Here I go:
1. Repetition, too bad the site does not provide an automatic search and review of posts on a new topic already covered, so one could review the topics posted and gauge if their new post is warrant of posting or if the topic has been exhausted or killed to death.
2. Poor search: unless you are a programmer with means to do searches with the *(star) wild card and do know how to use it, and results are often wild, then the chess.com search box needs a new interface and a brand new approach to searches, by poster name and topic, by pertinence on the subject, not an easy one here, and by chess player name, unless one types the exact name of a player the search returns a dead end street.
More flexibility into the search function of posts that I have contributed to, I should be able to ask for all of the posts in any forum in the last x or y days that I have posted in and the result should be to bring me on each and everyone of the comments I have made in any given post in a sequential or chronological order from day 1, meaning the first post I replied to.
3. No individual ref's, read my comments in /2 above it covers the subject.
4. Hey inane? Well many people just enjoy saying something with out being too articulate. It is their right, I do not subscribe to it but it is a fact of life tha
so people are North American people area analphabet to a high degree, litteracy in Canada is only 60% or so, so what do you expect? to stop people from expressing themselves the only way they can , I wholy disagree.
I suggest to educate people, through our own comment to the person in a nice way.
5. By the way the word is polarized I think and not polarised, unless you are a polarised bear, from the polar circle, which I think is not what you meant, it is a new word but I like it when applied to bears as it seems to have a polar connotation, and do correct me if I err.
Polarization or what I call antipodes people are simply people that have no opening to anything that they do not know, in my life experience at least and I am very generous here, at leats 50% of the people have no opinion on almost any topic, they simply recitate what they have heard on the news or read in the paper and cannot come up with any positive constructive criticism to propose any alternate solution to any problem.
Sorry if I am harsh but this is my experience of life and here I do not segregate groups, perhaps chess players are more active and better articulated.
People that are not only assertive but are adament about their comments or opinion lack a lot of pragmatism, called commom sense, and an opening to a new view on things.
6. No survey tools! Well the surveys done on chess.com need no survey tools as they are simple or simplistic or so elementary that no advanced tool is required believe you me, to analyse or decipher. Basically answer yes or no to any survey.
7. No ignore factor, filters to ignore and first recognize a wrong or inacceptable word or sentence is very similar to an antivirus software.
The amount of programming required, and I am sure that you more than any of us mostly recognize this, is absolutely aberrant.
You may want to lead the way to an approach.
8. Lack of spam hygene from moderators, you simply loose me here as my english is not up to to par on such terminology and meaning, perhaps you can explain or expand.
9. Excessive censorship,
Well if you had posted this thread a month ago my opinion would have been different.
But today I do feel that Erik whoever or whatever is family name is, is on a hunt for censorship, he has cut off 3 forums from cheater_1, the original one, which he has reinstated on a guilt crusade, and 2 others that I have personally identified as an alias to cheater_1, you cannot read these forums as when I posted my reply to uncover him, Erik erased them or removed them illico, and here I challenge Erik to deny what I am saying and to show these 2 forums.
One post was about cheater_10, claiming the next day that cheater_1 left, that he would continue the cheater_1s' legend, unfortunately for cheater_10, whom I suspect was cheater_1 without the zero, he could not have known about cheater one's forums and posts having joined chess.com the day after cheater_1 left and all of the tracks or posts had been removed by Erik, yes by Erik who else??
Cheater _10 was from Bermuda, he is quite a resourcefull person having created an alias from the Bermudas.
I will not expand on the second alias post return by cheater one if you want more explantions just ask Erik.
In a nutshell, censorship?
No absolutely not it's called censorship with a big fear!!
This is a witchcraft hunt.
Conclusion:
Bottom line:
1. Search engine needs a new facelift.
2. Honesty will always prevail and I challenge Erik to post the 2 new cheater_1 attempt to re-introduce himself to this site, if he decides to block the responses to the forum post fine with me .
Erik it's your call.
Will you dare respond or take a seat back?
D_Blackwell wrote:
paul211 - Addressing only the search aspect of your rant.
It only takes a modicum of research and skills to learn to do very sophisticated site searches.
Google - site:chess.com cheater_1
The site restriction plus the cheater_1 search request will provide more crap to read than most can stand.
Google - site:chess.com "King's Gambit"
The site restriction plus the exact match request will bring up plenty of SERPs.
artfizz wrote:
...
Speaking on behalf of polar bears: I will see if I can get the spelling of "polarised" changed in the Oxford English Dictionary [OED], Chambers English Dictionary, every other English dictionary I have ever consulted and UK web sites (especially the BBC's).
These dictionaries do offer "polarized" as an acceptable alternative; if someone does not know any better, then "polarized" is a good try. Standard British English usage, however, is almost fanatically polarised on this issue: I guarantee you will never hear the polar bears in LondonZoo use "polarize" (though they may use polar ice).
onosson wrote:
I don't know how complicated it would be to implement (my guess: fairly) but a system akin to what they have at slashdot.org would be fantastic, and might alleviate several concerns at once (1,2,3,8,9 possibly). Individual comments and even entire topics are rated by individual members, who are appointed as moderators on a rolling basis. From slashdot's help page at :
When moderators are given access, they are given a number of points of influence to play with. Each comment they moderate deducts a point. When they run out of points, they are done serving until next time it is their turn.
The system there works really, really well - it would be great if something like that could be implemented here!
Fantastic link, onosson. Here's an extract from slashdot's Goals:
Promote quality, discourage crap.
Make Slashdot as readable as possible for as many people as possible.
Do not require a huge amount of time from any single moderator.
Do not allow a single moderator a "reign of terror."
On the whole, we think the moderation system works really well, but often people disagree.
My main concern would be with raising the technical threshold for accessing the forums. Slashdot is aimed at a highly tech-savvy audience. The forum controls (for reading and commenting) on chess.com are weak but they have the merit of being relatively simple to use.
aabbccdd wrote:
what about post 13??
... (Counted to [including] post #13.)
Unlucky for some! Lucky for me you were counting.
p.s. You can't QUOTE tables.
Mm40 wrote:
I would say 1 is the most annoying.
Turp wrote:
13. Snobs
Turp wrote: 13. Snobs
All of the scores are going to come out at 1 - at this rate!
hondoham wrote:
i'm going with no survey tool.
{insert playful joke about artfizz or mainstreet}
as far as #1 goes, i think there is some movement here. when i first came on more than a year ago... it was all cheating cheating cheating cheating cheating.... resign resign resign resign resign resign resign.... in the forums
now it's more like cheating cheating resign resign. even the Database is getting buzzed out. i wish more people would showcase their games with personal analysis.... although i understand it opens you up to get poo-pooed on. (p.s. i would showcase a little more but i found myself with Too Many Games Too Many Games Too Many Games Too Many Games lately after signing up for a bunch of tourneys.)
Eiwob wrote:
Is "Easy" in the daily puzzles part of point 4? If so, 4.
artfizz wrote
... i wish more people would showcase their games with personal analysis.... although i understand it opens you up to get poo-pooed on. (p.s. i would showcase a little more but i found myself with Too Many Games Too Many Games Too Many Games Too Many Games lately after signing up for a bunch of tourneys.)
"You know, if there's one thing I've learned from being in the army,
it's never ignore a poo-poo. I knew a major. He got poo-pooed.
Made the mistake of ignoring the poo-poo. He poo-pooed it.
Fatal error, because it turned out all along that the soldier who
poo-pooed him had been poo-pooing a lot of other officers, who
poo-pooed their poo-poos. In the end, we had to disband the regiment
- morale totally destroyed - by poo-poo."
Black Adder
MainStreet wrote:
Annoying in the Forums? None at all.
Appying two rules from the book Don't Sweat The Small Stuff (and it's all small stuff):
Rule 1: Don't sweat the small stuff.
Rule 2: And it's all small stuff.
Chess rules. Forums entertain.
... as far as #1 goes, i think there is some movement here. when i first came on more than a year ago... it was all cheating cheating cheating cheating cheating.... resign resign resign resign resign resign resign.... in the forums
now it's more like cheating cheating resign resign. even the Database is getting buzzed out. ...
Given that Cheater_1 was the epitome of cheating (i.e. cheating personified). Isn't it odd that we never hear from Resigner_1 (nor Database_1, for that matter)? Perhaps these could become honory roles that could be held by different member in turn, like presidency of the EU, or Dr. Who.
jonnyjupiter wrote:
Or User_1.
Oops, that post was dangerously close to one of those annoying one-word posts.
Many apologies.
jonnyjupiter wrote: Or User_1.
User_1 could be the head honcho of whatever pro-database use group is largest.
Would that guy who resigned all his games a while back, ruffling some feathers at the time as I seem to recall, be in the running for the Resigner_1 label?
xMenace wrote:
Youtube video embedding
What's missing is the ability for MEMBERS to create their own surveys, possibly embedded within a forum post.
If I have a pressing question, say "What is your favorite openning move as White?" and I give 10 options and an amazing 2,500 members respond, please don't tell me to add up all the yesses and no's.
Most forums have basic survey capability. We have a survey on the main page every day. Why can't we have one for users in forums?
Here's an example.
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.