It seems like every time I look at the front page of this site I see a new post about rude players. While a reason has been a reply in each of these threads why people are rude on the internet, I will list it here again; anonymity. I would like to no longer see posts about the rude person you just finished playing. As such I offer a possible solution:

A simple thumbs up or thumbs down button should be displayed on every game that they play. When you hit thumbs up, it increases someone's rep, and the reverse with the thumbs down. A reputation number, borrowed the concept from XBOX live, could show whether this person is liked or disliked. Someone should only be able to vote for someone else just once, so as not to allow one person to just continually vote for someone else. As some people play many other people, a seek should show that player if/how they previously voted for the other player.

This solution would display a reputation, which might help shame some people into acting politely, but for the most part would show a perspective opponent how other people enjoyed playing that person.

Oh how I'd love to be able to thumb down people who never resign or wish me good luck, or say good game when it wasn't.

 Yes, I agree with you.  Some weirdos consider it rude to say "good luck" or "good game"???  You'd have to get into the rationale behind the rating, as what irks one member may or may not irk another.

we have devised a system to do this, but have not yet implemented.

If someone consistently gives bad rep to players who have a long history of good rep then a pattern starts to emerge.  As a result the system could not just necesarily track those who are rude, but also track those who are reporting innapropriately.

Good to see that you are planning to implement something like this Erik.

one additional thought - if for some reason you don't have an opinion about the opponent one way or the other there should be a third option that covers that possibility. thanks.

 Potentially good, potentially bad.  Could easily be abused.

I think you should leave rude players and polite players alone, and not add any more community minded interferences on the website's part. Personally, I'd rather be left alone, unburdened by a shallow rating system, and offended, if it happens to do that.

No Rude ratings please. Just read what people are saying is rude" good luck, good game" thats not rude, thats good sportsmanship. Would you rather they say "man you really stunk today" NO, that would be rude. As far as not resigning or accepting draws, not all players have the ability to see future moves, or some just think they can win everygame. My soluntion is, if you find a player who is rude, don't play them again.

Don't say good luck, say have fun.

Don't say good game, but instead just give a trophy.

You never know when you're speaking to someone who doesn't know English or is oversensitive.

lol sounds like maplestory =)

The intent is to make it so you are less likely to run into the person initially if they have bad feedback, so you won't have to go through the initial contact to then determine that you don't want to play them again. Or in the case where you play a lot of people, could you remember the exact person who you wanted to avoid?

Awesome!  I want to get a very high reputation.

People from all over the world are playing this well known site. Coming from various cultures, we tend to see things on different perspectives.  As long as players play within the rules of the site, perhaps we can take things including perceived rudeness in stride.  Let us just focus on our "common denominator", playing chess. If you do not like a player for his rudeness or for any other reasons, don't play him again.  Thumbs up and thumbs down button may only cause further misunderstanding.

Question:  I find no rules that say it is rude to not resign?   Why can't you people that have trouble winning just go ahead and checkmate?  I personally find it rude to whine about resigning.

How? According to his suggestion, you can only vote once per game. You may have a say in one game, but unless that person has only played a small amount of games, one vote would practically be irrelavant.

If there is a system to judge players, I'd advise not to simply have a "rating". There may be one displayed in the player's profile, but we should be able to categorize the rants, for example:

- Rude language in-game
- Unfair behavior (not accepting draws, not resigning...)
- Slow playing
- Whining, angry attitude...
- etc.

And, I think simply "flagging" players that have consistent complaints might be a better idea. They'd have a red flag next within their profile (or next to their names?) which means "This person showed a consistent unpleasant behavior in his or her last games". Also, it shouldn't be permanent. If the person was unpleasant in 10 games within a 20 games serie, they'd be flagged, but if they do another 10 games without complaints, the flag would be removed...

Just some ideas...

Perhaps a little off the topic of the thread, but personally, I never have a problem if my opponent refuses to resign.  I figure if he or she is truly in such desperate straits, then I should by implication be able to checkmate him or her in short order.  A refusal to resign may be either a function of a) my opponent truly thinking a stalemate or even checkmate is still possible; or, b) perhaps the opponent wants to see a checkmate completed by me for their own study in how to checkmate in their own future games.

One option to temper the effects of abuse might be to do something like weighting the ratings by the good-to-bad ratio of all previous ratings ever given by the person doing the rating.  This way someone who is hypersensitive wouldn't be likley to have a lot of impact anyway as they're probably going to have a low good-to-bad rating ratio.

Seems like a needless and potentially bad addition to this site. Very easy to abuse and if people give thumbs downs to other people who don't resign or happen to beat them decisively, players will be getting a bad reputation for simply playing good chess and not giving up.

It just seems like a really bad idea. The system is fine as it is, don't try to fix that which is not broken. If anything I would be happier to see more resources going into working on the lag in live chess, not this silly imperfect reputation system.