Fair Play Closures

Yes Jane. I fully know the reason some of them (one specifically) got a "second chance" but it's really bs. Everyone who has been around for a while knows about all the "stuff" that goes on and how chess.com bends their own rules if they think they might lose revenue (paid members). The hypocrisy is why I won't pay them and I know I'm not alone.  They ever decide to clean that up and people like me might go back to thinking it was worth paying for again.  Is what it is. 

Yeah, we have prisons too. What for? Just shoot them dead and boot them out into the cold. 

@sartresghost, have you ever met a reformed criminal?  It's not unheard of for someone who committed a crime in the past to regret their actions and stop.  Not every criminal reforms, but some do, which is why we don't have the death penalty or life imprisonment for every crime.  The same goes for cheating.  Repeat offenders have demonstrated that there is no reason to entrust them with a second chance; those who have been caught once, confessed, and apologised do sometimes stop - and often end up with a much lower rating at their new account.

There's also the difficulty in that, given internet technology, permabans are not possible.  Better to know who these people are by giving them an authorised second chance account than to have them sneak back in and you have to find them.

I believe this second accounts receive closer scrutiny which again is a great incentive for the user to play clean.

@MGleason, exactly my point. 

However the main reason I think is the money. But, I don't understand why people continuously complain about it. Chess.com is private business, this is the policy and nobody makes secret about it. So, take it or leave it. 

wonderful idea @Burzum78 (not) why are you so upset?

I'm not. What did make you think so? 

sounds like you may be as your argument doesn't make any sense to me. But that's just me maybe you have your reasons

I agree, but there are people who have been banned five times and in the sixth incarnation on a national team notes admit to being banned, but unfortunately the site does not yet have enough evidence that it is him and that is frustrating, especially since the national team owner supports it and approves ...On the other hand, the site does a great job and many will be found and banned again, which is why this site is the best on the internet ...

Yeah, argument doesn't make sense to you says a little about argument itself. Anyway, I can reassure you that I'm not upset at any way. Thanks for asking. 

Sorry, but the well known person I am thinking of hasn't changed one iota. I'm well aware of the difficulty in new versions of old faces - I'm pretty sure on some of those already too but that's too twisted and hard to police, I get that - but when they are transparent and exactly the same, I just don't get it. Oh well, never mind.

Sure, I can think of plenty of people who didn't change and cheated again at the new account.  But really, given the difficulty of keeping people away, even if as few as 10% of cheaters play clean in the second chance account, doesn't that make the policy worth it?  And I suspect the percentage is really a lot higher than that.

@juni_91, that can happen, but the site is far too big to actively monitor every case.  It could be that a second chance account was approved without knowing that it wasn't his first ban, because his previous account was not identified as a return account.  It could also be that he's here without permission - reporting him would help with that if you haven't already done so.

"It is not necessary to level all under one comb."

I don't. It's just that I've been away for quite a while and after catching up on all the news and gossip and happenings over the last 2 years I find it irritating that there seems to be two sets of rules. One, the official ones, that apply to most people, and then there are these handful of people who seem to be able to do anything, violate all the policies, and all that happens is they occasionally get muted for a week or so or in the rare case they get closed, they just get to come back and go right back to it again. Is what it is. 

Part of what you're seeing is that its a large site with a huge number of members, and things slip through the cracks.  If one person is abusive, a moderator might spot one instance of abuse and simply delete it, maybe send them a warning.  Another moderator might spot another instance and handle it similarly.  Possibly neither of them would notice that it's a major ongoing pattern.

Sure, it would be better to do a full investigation every time we deal with abusive behaviour, but moderators are unpaid volunteers with limited tools and don't have time for that, and support staff deal with a huge number of abuse reports.

There are procedures in place to try to help identify when abusive behaviour is a pattern (as opposed to one or two one-off instances that might have been provoked by the other person), but things don't always work perfectly.  The same will happen on any large online forum.

Interesting reading...I think the site does a great job weeding out the bottom feeders. I’ve been to a few online sites most have rampant cheating IMHO maybe I’m wrong and just can’t play3 x minutes (always good to have a fall back position, someone to blame. Works for me naa just joking🙂) 

The site has a lot of paid subscribers. Why do moderators work for free? Maybe it is worth hiring a few people who will do the job?

Support staff are paid.

Moderators volunteer for various reasons, but mostly to give back to a community that they appreciate.