Abused in Online chess

 It seems hard to argue that some things are not more offensive than others. Calling someone a redneck IS different than calling someone a dirty jew. It is not that I believe people are unequal, but I do believe insulting behavior can be on a spectrum. Why does it have to be all or nothing? This creates a false option that either nothing can be censored or everything must be.

how about disabling thier chat or ability to post forums instead of complete ban.  racism should not be tolerated though, they should be banned

 Your way results in some being punished worse than others and some not being punished at all , I have seen it on other sites. I dont see how "filthy jew" is more or less insulting than "inbred redneck" myself but I have seen people banned on other sites for the former and never for the latter ! It seems to me the only way to avoid such unequal enforcement is to have an all, or nothing, policy. I would prefer myself to just censor the one insulting me if I cant take it and be done with it.

Being a redneck country bumpkin myself, I am encouraged that there are rednecks in other countries!  I didn't know that Portugal has rednecks, too!  All kidding aside, I know that Chess.com does take these incidents seriously and following a series of repeated behaviors, they will take more action than just warnings.  Everyone makes mistakes once, and although the mistake is serious and offensive, inappropriate, and intolerable, perhaps it can be made a learning experience with a warning.  Although unlikely, the warning may be enough to help the person think about their actions from a differnt perspective, in a truly unique, world wide community that we have here on Chess.com.

Mike

 Read my profile Mike ! 

some crimes are penalized according to degree, some to be put in jail for a day, others for months, others for years, others for lifetime, and last death.  Being called a redneck is a direct personal insult, being called a dirty jew is massive - it includes the genealogy of the person, their history.  All abusive comments must be dealt with - accordingly.  Chess.com must impose the penalties but who will sanction the justice system.  This is a global site, we live in different locations with different constitutions, different religious beliefs, philosophies, etc.  What's abusive to some may not be abusive to others.  Others are tolerable, others like onions.  [ just voiced out my thoughts ]

Being called a redneck doesnt bother me , its the inbred part that offends....... redneck is simply a farmer/rural person..... I spent some of my life on a farm and almost all of it in rural areas..... so I am one, by definition

I agree 100%.

...lol You are really offended? Are you kidding me? Why can't people accept they are just words and not take offense? Call me whatever you want, I am only going to laugh at you.

The former is an attack on the person's religion and the latter isn't.  They are not equal.  However I would suggest, as someone inevitably does, that the intent behind the words are more important than the words themselves.  It is possible therefore for "inbred redneck" to be delivered in a more offensive tone than "filthy jew" may be, and, of course, all personal attacks should be made unwelcome regardless of their nature.

Unwelcome does not necessarilly mean verboten, a community that refuses to tolerate negative behaviour is infinitely more effective than a policeman.

we don't tolerate abuse, especially religious or racially motivated (which is much more serious than "you're a jerk").

that said, we generally give people one warning. they may not know that the site has strong policies. they might think they are immune as they might be on myspace or other mostly unmoderated sites. we think that giving people a second chance can maybe help them more than banning them immediately and making them more angry (though we aren't afraid to close accounts if there is more abuse).

Attack on their religion or attack on their identity, whatever.  Either way, it is an insult to someone's being...and they are equally offensive to the people being attacked.  Calling someone a Turkish trollop would be the same.  Bottom line, if you don't want to allow for nasty harassers, then it needs to be a blanket policy.  Pick your poison.

Oh, and I really like whoever came up with that 1 week suspension idea...that's clever and actually works!

I disagree -- an attack on someone's identity (i.e. "You're a jerk") is an attack against an individual and although still reprehensible it is less egregious as an attack on someones race, religion or creed, which is an attack on the entire group.

I once beat a higher rated player and when he resigned he cussed and swore all kinds of garbage at me. I laughed it off, I mean it's just a game.

Clarification:  An attack on someones race, religion, creed or baseball allegiance is an attack on the entire group.

 I don't understand Grobe, is there a difference between religion and Baseball allegiance?

I believe you're thinking of hockey.

warinigs ll never work out.....

just ban them....

chess s a really beautful n gentlemans game.....

yes, in my house, bagging on the dodgers is far worse than ripping the religion i was raised in...

from the fights you see in Europe, you'd think soccer/football is a religion.