Most Shocking Account Closure

Sort:
Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
RonaldJosephCote wrote:

     " He just closed it today".    Your just full of legitimate info.                                                                                              

"pfren closed THEIR account on Feb 16, 2023".

I find it strange that the word "their" was used, so according to chess.com pfren is multiple people. It's suspect and seems to hint at something.

Avatar of RevolvingPotato
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:
RonaldJosephCote wrote:

     " He just closed it today".    Your just full of legitimate info.                                                                                              

"pfren closed THEIR account on Feb 16, 2023".

I find it strange that the word "their" was used, so according to chess.com pfren is multiple people. It's suspect and seems to hint at something.

lol

Get your grammar correct kid

Its for respect

Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
RevolvingPotato wrote:
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:
RonaldJosephCote wrote:

     " He just closed it today".    Your just full of legitimate info.                                                                                              

"pfren closed THEIR account on Feb 16, 2023".

I find it strange that the word "their" was used, so according to chess.com pfren is multiple people. It's suspect and seems to hint at something.

lol

Get your grammar correct kid

Its for respect

What makes you think I'm a kid? Using "their" to denote one person is incorrect grammar. So we have to use incorrect grammar as an act of respect.

Avatar of KingPawnTommy

Well deserved account closure to be honest, all he did was argue with beginners about what opening is "good" to play. And the only openings that were "good" to play were the ones he played. He just had a negative atitude and did seem pretty bored with his life

Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
KingPawnTommy wrote:

Well deserved account closure to be honest, all he did was argue with beginners about what opening is "good" to play. And the only openings that were "good" to play were the ones he played. He just had a negative atitude and did seem pretty bored with his life

I don't see why you have a problem with pfren, he could be quite pretentious and a bit condescending, but he wasn't awful. He did have a bit of an elitist hivemind mentality though.

I'm not keen on NervesOfButter, he could be helpful at times but he was horrible as well.

Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
CaracticusPotts wrote:

‘Indicate’ one person….just saying.🤡

I agree, it's weird. Probably to do with pronouns or something, although it could also have something to do with coorporate legalism.

Avatar of idilis
dramacool02 wrote:

Watch korean drama movies and shows Online for free *snip ad*

No we have enough drama here. Mods, I thought you were watching?

Avatar of idilis
CaracticusPotts wrote:

‘Indicate’ one person….just saying.🤡

Denote was probably intended

Avatar of RevolvingPotato
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:
RevolvingPotato wrote:
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:
RonaldJosephCote wrote:

     " He just closed it today".    Your just full of legitimate info.                                                                                              

"pfren closed THEIR account on Feb 16, 2023".

I find it strange that the word "their" was used, so according to chess.com pfren is multiple people. It's suspect and seems to hint at something.

lol

Get your grammar correct kid

Its for respect

What makes you think I'm a kid? Using "their" to donate one person is incorrect grammar. So we have to use incorrect grammar as an act of respect.

I am more certain now that you're a kid

"donate" one person-to what? charity?

"So we have to use incorrect grammar as an act of respect"-??!!!

Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
RevolvingPotato wrote:
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:
RevolvingPotato wrote:
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:
RonaldJosephCote wrote:

     " He just closed it today".    Your just full of legitimate info.                                                                                              

"pfren closed THEIR account on Feb 16, 2023".

I find it strange that the word "their" was used, so according to chess.com pfren is multiple people. It's suspect and seems to hint at something.

lol

Get your grammar correct kid

Its for respect

What makes you think I'm a kid? Using "their" to donate one person is incorrect grammar. So we have to use incorrect grammar as an act of respect.

I am more certain now that you're a kid

"donate" one person-to what? charity?

"So we have to use incorrect grammar as an act of respect"-??!!!

I'm pretty sure that making a typo doesn't make me a kid. The fact that you weren't able to tell it was typo probably means you aren't a grown up, because any grown up would have been able to tell that I could have possibly made a mistake, it might just have been a typo, who knows? Some people are more prone to typos and misspelling than others, even just basic finger slip ups, surely as an adult you would have known this? Unless of course you just made a logical slip up, which even adults are known to commit?

Avatar of RevolvingPotato

Well, this proves beyond a doubt that you're a kid

You just keep coming back with even more braindead explanations trynna prove that you're an adult

The main point was the 2nd one but all you were focused on was why I mentioned the typo..

Avatar of arron

Are both of y’all adults? Cuz u keep arguing about useless things. Now stop and move on with your life.

Avatar of Abhinav

Just got to know about IM pfren's account closure. It appears that he was muted (possibly an auto-mute by a bot) and decided to call it quits.

He was a great pfriend to the chess.com community, and his expert inputs will be sorely missed.

And it looks like the thread dedicated to him has also been removed after @Ahphoey got banned. Sad. tear

Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
RevolvingPotato wrote:

Well, this proves beyond a doubt that you're a kid

You just keep coming back with even more braindead explanations trynna prove that you're an adult

The main point was the 2nd one but all you were focused on was why I mentioned the typo..

You are suffering from confirmation bias, you assume just because someone questions you that you must be right, because if you were wrong, they wouldn't have the need to question you, which is a fallacy. What if I didn't question you? You would still be firmly fixed in your opinions.

Calling someones perfectly reasonable explanations brain-dead is an ad hominem.

You are lying in your last sentence. I didn't take offense nor did I show any disapproval as to why you pointed out the typo, I'm perfectly happy that you pointed out the typo, I was simply questioning why you called me a kid, it doesn't bother me, I was just curious as to why you called me a kid.

Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
Arronic wrote:

Are both of y’all adults? Cuz u keep arguing about useless things. Now stop and move on with your life.

I'm not arguing, just questioning.

Avatar of Typewriter44
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:

 

Calling someones perfectly reasonable explanations brain-dead is an ad hominem.

No it's not.

Avatar of taseredbirdinstinct
Typewriter44 wrote:
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:

 

Calling someones perfectly reasonable explanations brain-dead is an ad hominem.

No it's not.

The definition of an ad hominem is using an insult instead of a logical rebuttal. An accusation is not a rebuttal, an accusation has to be proven or at least hold strong evidence in order to hold logical weight.

Avatar of DejarikDreams
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:
Typewriter44 wrote:
taseredbirdinstinct wrote:

 

Calling someones perfectly reasonable explanations brain-dead is an ad hominem.

No it's not.

The definition of an ad hominem is using an insult instead of a logical rebuttal. An accusation is not a rebuttal, an accusation has to be proven or at least hold strong evidence in order to hold logical weight.

From Webster’s: Ad hominem - 

  • 1: appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
  • 2: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made
  • Definition #2 is the most common understanding of ad hominem.
Avatar of arron
wooper_army wrote:

i called someone an idoit for disconnecting (yes, idoit)

they didn't see it but I'm not in danger right D:

Nah you won’t be in danger. You did what though?

Avatar of arron
wooper_army wrote:

I did what?

You said to that person “ I do it.” What did you do?