‎ ‎ ‎ ‎This forum has exploded

Doesn't allow nudity, but tolerates the likes of you. Go figure.

Wait are we allowed to mention sites? What I got is you can't say "can we use this feature like (insert website) does?", but can we say, "Do you play on (insert website)?"

Take this post for example: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/general/ddffffffff

Nothing but gibberish/nonsense.  Its posted in General Chess....if it gets reported, it will be moved to Off Topic.  Why?  Who knows.

Coke wouldn't allow Pepsi to advertise on their site, GM doesn't want Ford adds on theirs. I understand this, I think most people do. After all, it's their business. We, as users, see this site much differently than Chess.com, the business, does. It isn't a business to us; it's entertainment, relaxation, a distraction. To Chess.com it is a business and that how they run it.

Do I think sometimes it's taken a bit too extreme? Yes. But it's their business, their rules, so we should try to place nice while in their sandbox.

It's understandable to be frightened of competitor sites when you've based your recent business strategy on quantity over quality.

But I have freedom of speech. Sometimes when people go to restaurants they say other restaurants are better. There is nothing wrong with that 

Chess.Com is also considered to be one of the best chess sites, much better than others. So why are they worrying about others, it does not make sense. I hav freedom of speech. I am not even saying anything hateful.

*have

Those normally get deleted when seen. Gone now

You have freedom of speech, but not here. Here your speech is regulated and monitored. Which most people agree is certainly their right. They can make any limit they want, including banning people with red hair if they want. 

But your point about other restaurants is a good one. At my place of business, people talk about the competition all the time. And I engage with them whenever I can about that too. I love to talk about the competition because I have nothing to worry about. And the customer likes it because it provides honest and fair interaction about the pros and cons of competing businesses. Everyone wins. A customer is going to be very skeptical if I were to either ban mentioning competition or even worse, if I were to bash my competition. 

It's pretty obvious that if someone limits or bans normal ordinary speech it's only because they have some insecurity that they dont want others to know about. 

Freedom of speech is a guarantee against censorship by governments and isn't about private industry.

If you go to a restaurant and start talking loudly how much better one of their competitors is, I don't think you'll be very welcome. It isn't really that different. They also wouldn't let you stick up an advertisement or coupons for that or other competitors either..

Simple fact is, the site has rules and guidelines and can enforce them. If you would like that to change, send in a suggestion to staff asking that guideline be removed.

Help > Make a Suggestion

Maybe @erik will decide that allowing competitor sites to be posted all over the forums is fine. I'm not going to hold my breath on that though 

Wait so, can you mention a website? Like at all? Even if it's a question like, "do you play on (website)?"

Thank You Martin.  TO many time i just seem them moved to off topic.

You're confusing the first amendment with the internet.

I dont think that's his point or concern. I'm sure most people would agree this business, and ANY business would not welcome any situation you just described. Of course chess.com, or any other business, would not approve of anyone loudly saying how much better the competition is at that place of business. That's obvious.

I think his point was that mentioning the competition is generally not allowed. Not even to compare.

For example comparing auto resign features would probably not be allowed. Not even discussing which is better, simply stating the facts of any differences would probably not be allowed. 

Generally speaking, a casual mention isn't normally that bad, but comparison s usually are not allowed. That said, normally when any particular site is brought up, it gets plastered on multiple posts, comparisons start, people post links to tournaments, etc (a little hyperbole there).

Ah mk

It easy enough to make a comparison of a feature without directly naming a specific site. For example, "I don't like the way this site handles lag compensation, other sites use time seal and I think chess.com should." (Not my opinion on lag compensation)

There is nothing wrong with making suggestions or mentioning how else it might be done. The problem occurs when these other sites are constantly brought up and you get the "I don't play here, I play on X because..," and the multiple variations that are often posted in an effort to get people to use a different site.

Honestly, I dont even think its an attempt t get people to play on another site.  Its more about doing something they know they are not supposed to do.