2-Step Authorization at Login Feature

First page, post 5, the link I provided in the recent topic about the question that let directly to the post.

Staff as in the CEO

If you (@Martin_Stahl) are unable to pressure "the team" to do anything, then who can?

You are the most prominent person in these forums; you are the most engaged chess.com volunteer on this platform; everyone knows who "Martin" is; YOU have your finger on the pulse of the chess.com community.

If anyone can make a recommendation to staff, or apply pressure or persuasion to staff – it has to be @Martin_Stahl.

If you are unwilling, reluctant, or not able to apply pressure or persuasion to staff, then I might wonder why you are volunteering in this capacity? It seems like a thankless job, unless they thank you for keeping the wolves away.

If the buck truly stops with @eric, then he must have surrounded himself with a bunch of Yes-Men and Women who are unwilling to make suggestions to improve the platform.

It feels as if we are dog-piling on you, but there is no one else on these forums or clubs who will answer questions or take the heat.

As to your other questions, I will pass along things to staff (bugs and useful suggestions) and staff are admins in the club and read many posts (not sure about all of them).

They don't sit around cubicles as staff are 100% remote but they do use meeting options. I can't say how on all decisions but a lot are certainly discussed, some are decided from the top, and some are generated by product teams. Some things have been suggested in the past and decided they won't happen, some have been liked and put on the roadmap (some on the backlog and some have more priority)

His response to this was in 2019? That was 5-years ago. I think someone ought to ask @Eric if anything in the world has changed in the last 5 years.

If "Staff" is the CEO/@Eric, then what titles do all of the other chess.com employees have?

What does a chess.com "Staff Meeting" look and sound like if there is just one staff member?

How does "staff" collaborate, adjust and plan for the future, solve problems... if there is only one staff-person?

If all y'all work and volunteer for a guy who refuses to take input from his minions, then I can only wonder why anyone is still there.

Staff make the decisions. I can suggest things, refer other suggestion, and bring other things to staff attention but I have very little sway on things that ultimately get done. As far as I can tell, other staff don't just nod and go along with the flow; they help drive decisions but there are things that can come from the top (just like in any organization)

I've been asked to help out here and do, I interface with staff pretty much every day, providing reports of things I see here and in the general forums, in my daily process of answering topics.

It has come up more recently in other areas (not in the forums) and the stance hadn't changed. While I'm not privy to every conversation, and things can change, it hadn't as recently as a couple of months ago.

Staff use various collaboration software, just like other companies.

There are 600+ staff across all chess.com related properties. A lot of staff for chess.com are listed here: https://www.chess.com/about

Also check out https://www.chess.com/article/view/how-chess-com-virtual-team-works-together

this simply becomes a huge argument

I bet other companies don't collaborate on reports and suggestions going through 10 different reporting methods; when those reports and suggestions could be sent to one central depository for logging, tracking, discussion, and follow-up.

But you said earlier that chess.com had a Staff of "one"... the CEO... @Erik

When you say or type "staff", are those staff people:

• Volunteers?
• Volunteer Moderators?
• Volunteer Admins?
• Volunteer Super Admins?
• Volunteer Contributors?
• Volunteer Authors?

How many paid "staff" people does chess.com have? Or is chess.com using volunteers to take-over the chess world?

That article was published in December 2019 (Four years ago). Please ask @Erik to provide us with an update on how the virtual team works today, as well as why there are not enough paid or volunteer moderators to keep chess.com a healthy and friendly place for people of all ages, genders, religions, nationalities, and etc.

If you read it you'll see it was also updated in 2022. Most of it is the same.

I did not say there was one staff member. But the CEO will sometime make the final decisions. The staff count is paid staff and doesn't include volunteer moderators. At the time of the update in the link I posted, staff (paid positions) was at 400+ now it's higher, though many of those are going to be primarily involved with the other owned sites.

You just seem to be reluctant to do something about this, mainly when you see many users requesting the feature.

In the last 5 years the world changed a lot. Even in the last year, I've seen so many people starting to worry about security of their accounts. And it's not just about the importance of their data. It's their accounts! People don't want to lose access to their accounts, mainly because a website refuses to implement the most basic of features, almost every site and tool has 2FA support these days.

People change their minds, so keep @Eric updated on the will of the users on this feature. We all said stuff like "X will never happen" or "I will never like/want/do Y", but a few years later we know we were just wrong.

Users want 2FA, even if it's just 10% of users, it's a LOT!

It has nothing to do with reluctance. I don't make decisions and can't influence staff much more than any other member.

Sorry about me not being very polite, but your latest week's comments seem trying to demote people from suggesting they want this feature implemented. I don't want to be rude, but we have a saying, which is something like "if you can't help, don't get in the way.". If you can help, please do.

Let's think in a construtive and objective manner. Where can we do something more to make this a feature? Some kind of petition/vote?

Thanks

I just have pointed out that staff have weighed in on the feature. I don't know if a large number of members requesting it could result in a change or not. Though my guess is if it ever happened, it would probably be a premium only feature.

At the end of the day, you need to realize that chess.com is a private entity that can and will do what it wants in terms of features. if the CEO has already decided that it's not a worthwhile feature for normal or even premium users to have. Then that's the end of the discussion. You can complain all you want but let's be a bit more respectful here. While I do think Erics opinion on this is pretty much insane, that doesn't change the fact it dies with him. Let's not shoot the mod that has been very professional here.

Martin can but deliver the user sentiment to chess.com staff and they will do what they will with that. but that's the end of it period. in short, don't be a dick.

Cool! We can tell other users to not be dicks and there's no need to be worried about getting muted, deleted, or banned! Apparently "dick" is not in the filter list, but other innocuous words will send our posts to the circular file.

On another note, I don't think anyone has been disrespectful toward Martin. As the most active Moderator on the platform, he is essentially the intermediary between the users and Chess.com. I think he handles the heat quite well.

The Beta Club is also an opt-in type of club, and as long as no one violates the ToS and Community Standards, everyone is free to flame chess.com (or Martin) for anything and everything in an effort to enhance the user experience.

Then again... it's a "Club"... and there may be some debate on who is responsible for maintaining law and order here. The ToS and Community Standards may not even apply here.

If you don't think you or others have not been disrespectful then you need to re-read what has been posted over the past few days and then do some more reflection if you still dont think so.

@MrTacos Please do not talk to me or others in this thread or forum about disrespect. Maybe you should take a surf through the forums on chess.com and take note of the number of forum posts and replies that contain references to racism, antisemitism, sexism, transphobia, homophobia, female intelligence, killing, murder, rape, poisoning, suggestions that users commit suicide, prostitution, drug sales, and... do I need to go on?

You are saying that users who ask for change on this platform are being disrespectful; I will say that users on this platform are asking to be respected by the people who manage this platform.

There are far-worse comments made in other forums than the emotional heat generated here.