Hi everyone !
I for one am sick and tired of arrogant players and poor sportsmanship. I am sure I don't have to explain myself, everyone has played people like this.
Since we have no referees to enforce good sportsmanship, I suggest having a sportsmanship meter. Have it on the player's profile or even beside the nickname when placing a seek. A player who has been slandered can go on the offending player's profile and take off points (or give points in the case of good sportsmanship). Players could then choose not to play members with a low sportsmanship rating.
What do you think ? (and I hope staff are reading this post)
Thanks !
So lets put a limit on the amount of points we can give or subtract.
A feedback system could work.
A player who abuses the system (who gives bad ratings to someone who generally has a good rating) would themselves be less trustworthy.
It's like the credit card fraud analysis. When a guy calls up saying that he wants to remove a charge from a certain merchant, you need more information.
If the merchant has all sorts of other complaints, then it is likely their fault.
If the guy complains against tons of merchants (just trying to get free stuff basically) then it is likely his fault. One can get a lot of information by analyzing this graph.
In the past, I've called this idea sort of a credit rating, but I like the term sportsmanship meter much better! :-)
It could possibly work the other way around, if people were only able to increase one's sportmanship meter, allowing the fair players to rise to the top, then it would be less likely to be completely abused....but then we already have that with the 'good sportmanship' trophies. Perhaps something for you to look out for when screening opponents.
Innocent people will get abused by unsportsmanship on the wrong side. A player who is upset with a loss will unethically try to make a person look bad for it.
This is not a well considered idea to have, in my opinion.
... so propose a modification to make it a better idea.
I'm both amused and horrified.
I totally understand your idea and agree with you if it could work, but I don't think it would materialized into anything beneficial. Basically, it would do more harm to the good and honest people, then it would to point out ungentleman- like bafoons. Take the idea and go with it if you feel strongly about it, because, again, it has good intent.
I think a refined version of this idea has the potential to work. It just needs to be analyzed and planned out properly (by staff ?). ...and yes, I do feel strongly about this subject. Thanks for the reply =o).
That makes two of us.. Such a feature will only end up being abused.
Perhaps we could have as part of the game box aftermath one more thing befoe
we close and move on to the next match a small selection of tickables as to
the satisfaction with this encounter...ie. check-lower rated player with some
good ideas but rude chat.......check-good player but unceasing chat abuse.....
check-no moves just clock left running..... anyway this would be something
like the restaurants have "How was the service today?"
a good idea but can't be implemented. if someone can go to someone's profile and start adding or subtracting points, that certainly will be abused by some people. much better to just not play the arrogant/mean spirited people in the future after you have a bad experience with them. don't forget you can also block any member you want so you won't have to deal with them again. good luck
... there are way too many players who have unsportsmanship conduct to block them all. And yes, I block the bad apples, but it is not enough. There must be some other solution.
Incidentally, there is already an indicator behind the scenes that would give some kind of a picture how a particular user is viewed by the rest of the community: How many people have me blocked. It could probably be exposed without much effort and might well serve the purpose outlined by the original poster.
Just brainstorming...maybe if they could be sure that a person couldn't vote for or against you more than once...AND as cobblepot mentioned, I think...they could also keep track of the percentage of positive versus negative feedback a person is giving their opponents...
with the time and resources of the Chess.com staff...this is probably one of the last things to which I'd care for them to devote energy.
Isn't the disable chat feature sufficient? And reporting someone if they are really crude?
Hm...I've had 3 really disturbing encounters in chat and I didn't block any of them (I did disable chat) but I have blocked some tournament or group directors who overinvite...so I'm not sure the block thing means much.
Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.
