Admin Guide: Dealing with Rogue Vote Chess Voters

Admin guides are not rules that you must follow in your own club.  They are examples that you can adopt in full or in part if you find them useful.  Feel free to copy them and share them elsewhere, but if you borrow heavily from someone else's work it would be polite to credit them.

Every club that plays vote chess and tries to have an organised discussion faces problems with rogue voters.  When someone votes early without a good reason and without participating in the discussion, for a first offence, send them a message similar to this:

Hey!
It's good to see you taking part in our vote chess games at (insert your club's name)!
Just a comment on how we like to play vote chess: we like to discuss the position and analyse it together before we vote. So we have the following rules:
1. Don't vote until the last 24 hours unless there's a good reason.
2. Only vote for a move that has been discussed in the comments.
3. Anyone can suggest a candidate move.
Here's the rules in full: (insert link to your club's vote chess policies)

If you see a good move, add a comment suggesting it and explaining why you think it's a good move! Then other players can consider it and vote for it too, or we can explain why it's not a good move after all.

Waiting for the last 24 hours to vote also means we have two days (adapt this if you're not playing three-day games) to discuss the position and consider several different possible moves. You can't change your vote, so if people vote early and then someone discovers a problem with that move, we may not be able to get enough votes to chose a different move.

Thanks!

Then you should have a thread in your HQ club where you track people who have been warned and when the warning was issued, and what response, if any, was received.

If you receive a positive response, it is often worthwhile being more patient on a second offence.  If you do not receive a meaningful positive response, it's time to take action.  Either remove the rogue voter from your club, or remove them from all vote chess games and add them to a list of members to be removed from vote chess games in future.  Some rogue voters do participate in team matches too, and so may be worth keeping around in the club if that's important to you.

Do you have a similar set of policies that would be useful for other admins to consider, or any other useful feedback?  Please share in the comments!

In my favorite group we have similar guidelines. I usually work it like this.

First offense, friendly reminder (much like the one above).

Second offense, less friendly reminder.

Third offense - might go either of two ways: First way - if the player was not a strong contributor = booted out of game and banned from vote chess and possible booted from group. Second way - if player was a strong contributor = booted from that game and allowed to play other games. If another case of breaking rules then removed from all games and booted from group.

I have booted many and don't regret a single one.

Good points ... and I apply them regardless of rating. Kicking your highest rated player might lower your performance, but if it transforms an uncomfortable game with few posts to active collaboration, I think that's a win.

Back in the V2 days it was necessary to kick a player from the club to force them out of vote chess games ... still no regrets.

Reading content, surprised a recommendation for removal mooted after only a couple of wayward votes.

Rather more long winded approach adopted within Team England than #1, takes a minimum of 6 early / errant votes prior losing someone from the team, usually more, with emphasis placed upon coaching and only kicking a team member as a last resort. 3 day vote chess may take months of dialogue with the 'earlies' and most seem to either settle in or lose interest and leave themselves.

Information via V3 who, what, when of voting, the why needs more exploration. If for example new team member(s) voted early or for moves not discussed, during the opponents move time I will post on these within team notes, perhaps with a comment on my view of the merits of the move (if wishing to try and as an admin modestly rated consider involving a stronger player) and also include a link to the clubs vc guidelines, which new members receive Team England as part of their induction document within a month of joining the club, and some might even pay attention to it.

After around 3 occasions of early / errant voting would then consider moving onto dialogue with advisory pms.

In relation to the ops recommended text as copied and pasted below, for me reads terribly, unduly defensive and if looking to annoy someone would be a good way of going about it, the subject matter appears to be in the ballpark, however not my style and would need a full rewrite, highlighted in bold some wording I would avoid. Take it or leave it approach seems strange, probably should ask for the members views somewhere within the pm.

Hey! ??  anonymous profile
It's good to see you taking part in our vote chess games at (insert your club's name)!
Just a comment on how we like to play vote chess: we like to discuss the position and analyse it together before we vote. So we have the following rules:
1. Don't vote until the last 24 hours unless there's a good reason.
2. Only vote for a move that has been discussed in the comments.
3. Anyone can suggest a candidate move.
Here's the rules in full: (insert link to your club's vote chess policies)

If you see a good move, add a comment suggesting it and explaining why you think it's a good move! Then other players can consider it and vote for it too, or we can explain why it's not a good move after all.

Waiting for the last 24 hours to vote also means we have two days (adapt this if you're not playing three-day games) to discuss the position and consider several different possible moves. You can't change your vote, so if people vote early and then someone discovers a problem with that move, we may not be able to get enough votes to chose a different move.

Thanks! ?? Anonymous admin

Go to tjhe game and drop down the list of members in the game. Find that person's name. Hover over it and you will get options appear to the rigfht. One is an X. That boots them from just that game.

Good luck.

Yea. Apply the boot. Always be generous with the boot!

Must members in my club just don't join any of the vote chess or daily matches. What should I do with them?

That's normal.  Most people are inactive or only occasionally participate.  But they're not hurting anything either.

It seems to me that we've gone over all this before. It is probably worth mentioning that a lot of new people have joined chess.com and the many different clubs, that take part in vote chess competitions. The rules ( guidelines ) that we use are the same for everybody, who participates. The difference is that some people don't read them, they don't take part in discussions, they don't even scroll down to see if there is anything down there at all. They just turn up, vote for whatever they feel like and skip to the next game. We call these guys DBV' ers, Drive By Voters. The team captain usually messages them with friendly warning, informing them that the next time they will be removed. The usual response is an apology which is noted and 99/100 times the problem is fixed and you have a participant, who will follow instructions. If a dbv'er does it again, they're gone from that game! This works well for us, however it may not work so well for other clubs, maybe smaller ones with fewer participants. These clubs are probably best to formulate something that works for them. I don't believe 'pussyfooting' around works. If someone doesn't want to follow the team rules and ignore everything that's being said, then it's the @JustADude80 therapy! Excuse the pun.

Uh ok.

Removing people from vc games is not possible

Click the Remove Button, hover over someones username and you'll see it.

Any picture of the remoce button?

You need to be on the Members tab. Then hover your mouse over their name, and click on the X.

How abt mob?

Oh found it, thanks