The person who has the nickname - <removed by staff>, resigns in winning positions. He told me so.He told me not to resign because he will. He is trying to get an elo of 300. This was on live chess. I got the resign in before he did when he told me this. So beware of this player !!!

You should use the report abuse link at the bottom of each page for this type of thing as opposed to publicly calling someone out.

Thanks for publicly calling out badisgood, Anothernewjack, if you had only reported abuse I wouldn't have known that I should avoid playing this joker!

TheGrobe: 

I didnt call him out. he told me this bluntly..

Yeah, well, your Twins showed up the Tigers, and that's even worse!

Sorry, not a Twins fan !

Out of curiosity and lack of knowledge, why would someone want a rating of 300? How is this a desirable thing?

Or... am I completely missing the point of this thread? :)

He said it was an experiment. I don't get it..

i think chess.com's policy of not being able to discuss this type of thing in the forums is funny.

Well, that's good for you, it means that I, as a Tigers fan, will be willing to help you! :-) j/k

As for your original post, please don't call out players like that publicly, it just makes for problems. I see that you have sent in an abuse report, this is the proper thing to do. I will look into this issue. Thanks.

Why is it funny?  There should be one standard (the site's) for when a user gets his name publicly dragged through the mud not 800,000.

i just think it's funny---like interesting.  i don't think it's wrong althoug i don't think it's right either.  how vague.  sorry.  if someone says he is sandbaggin on purpose.  he admits it to people, then why sjhould his name be out in the forums?  to save his good name?  he doesn't have a good name.  he's publicly admited to be a sandbagger.  seems pretty cut and dry.

now if a person is a suspected cheater or sandbagger or whatev...  then yes, plublicly destroying this person is pretty counter-prodctive.  these types of discrepancies amke the "rule" a little funny to me.

True, except that we have only the postwriters word for it. (That doesn't mean I don't believe him, but it's really easy to claim someone told you something in chat).

Ya, well, Im sure the moderators can look back at the conversation.