pocoloco-1 wrote:

I found that in our chess programs we lost most of the girls by age 12 or so and I'm convinced it was because of the boy's rude and agressive behavior.

In the next "Women & Chess" thread, could you please repeat that?

is he not allowed his opinion without it meeting the approval of your theoretical impression about chess/equality topics??

So if some 12 year old girls are ever ever intimidated by some agressive boys (which of course never happens right?) then how can one ever mention it seeing as it cannot and shouldn't ever be mentioned in such PC topics?

Actually, this is in effect what Tarrasch said to Lasker before their match. They had a conflict of personalities, let's say.

I'm encouraging him to repeat his observation.

Should never have brought it up.  Just ignore.

lol thanks for the laugh

I think if you do some reading up on the rules under which much of the world operates, you'll find that's not the case . . .

"I have found a group True Chessplayers to avoid this, but no one seems interested. Or are others only patzers and cheaters?"

Wow!  I would never have guessed that those were the only two possible reasons not a single person has joined your group in the 4.5 months since it was created.  After I read your introduction and rules on the group page, I would have thought people didn't join just because they thought it was stupid.  Thanks for setting me straight!

--Cystem 

Internet people can be divided into two main groups: spoiled and naive. Spoiled ones enjoy anonymity: they can abuse others, lie, joke, call names, cheat etc. Naive don't care. I just think the time has come: naive to woke up, spoiled to be kicked. I want nothing more than option to avoid playing anonyms and I just hope that chess.com community will evolve towards the better side.

Anonymity could be an option, but anonymous chessplayers should be treated as outsiders in the community.

You have the tools to protect you from rude people, disable chat and block functions. The site cannot force people to act politely (except to some extent in main chat), and doesn't have the time to deal with whether someone called you a patzer etc.

 Lol... nice pic

hmmmm....this would make a good discovery channel program.

Some people got no life

If only you had a few underachieving idiots to laugh with you! You'd be something then eh? Try cliques.com instead.

I thought that anonymity was one of the good things about the Internet. After a while though the handle becomes something pretty much like a name.

Anyway if people were required to give their real name there would be a lot of Tom Smiths and Paula Joneses.

They DO give out tropies for good sportsmanship.

No, anonymity is the worst thing about the Internet.  If everyone was forced to identify themselves then the experience would be a lot better for everyone.  Pretty much gone would be online game cheating, flaming, hacking and a whole range of other antisocial behaviour.

This doesn't help much though.  It would be good to have a "poor sportsmanship" trophy as well...