I am just curious: do we have a concrete way to know that @Ouims and @TacticalTrickyKnight are the same people? Is it possible that @Ouims was lying?
Accuser Takes the Deal
Sort:
Dec 13, 2017
0
#83
EOGuel wrote:
I am just curious: do we have a concrete way to know that @Ouims and @TacticalTrickyKnight are the same people? Is it possible that @Ouims was lying?
There are some additional checks we apply before we reach this conclusion - Chess.com doesn't assume that accounts belong to the same people just because one of those people claim they are.
Dec 13, 2017
0
#84
david wrote:
EOGuel wrote:
I am just curious: do we have a concrete way to know that @Ouims and @TacticalTrickyKnight are the same people? Is it possible that @Ouims was lying?
There are some additional checks we apply before we reach this conclusion - Chess.com doesn't assume that accounts belong to the same people just because one of those people claim they are.
That makes sense. What I thought. 
Dec 13, 2017
0
#85
erik wrote:
Ouims wrote:
Hey Erik, it's tacticaltrickyknight.
I sent you a pm but what you're attempting to do here is more like a personal attack more than anything.
You spend hours on MY website attacking me and our service and making up fake numbers and lying to thousands of people online and then YOU get upset that I posted the PUBLIC chat and FACTS about your game history?
Hilarious!!
well at first I laughed really hard, I mean nothing bad with him but he really should double check what he think before speaking and making a fool out of himself, unfortunately on a second thought it's a very sad thing and isn't hilarious anymore...
Dec 13, 2017
0
#86
i play on other sites, but over all none compare to this site, i would never question someone
smart enough to build a site like chess.com
Dec 13, 2017
0
#88
Miss-Robot wrote:
Very immature. Permanently muting somebody because they think different to yourself is a bit much is it not. Is this North Korea? Chess.com staff really love bullying it's members and then naming and shaming them which is against the terms of service.
Member Since: Nov 28, 2011
18 total games
All played 12/12-13/2017
And this is the first post.
Another sleeper cell.
Dec 13, 2017
0
#89
I just hoped I could have something brilliant to bring into this discussion, which is brilliant, in a milky way.
i dont kno how to please
M8in28 wrote:
hahaha, that was funny, I'm gonna say on his behalf since I pushed him to take the deal also, would you please consider unmutting him for christmas. This gives him some time to think before he blows things out of proportion next time and you're also not too taugh on him . Also to be honest there is some truth in what he said. While MOST people don't cheat, there are some who do, and they really spoil the game. 1 clue to knowing if they cheat or not, is they have no pic in their account and their account is new, usually cheats don't last long here, which is a good thing.
Can people cheat in 1' games? How do they have the time?
Dec 14, 2017
0
#91
the_johnjohn wrote:
Can people cheat in 1' games?
Yes.
the_johnjohn wrote:
How do they have the time?
It only means they don't have time to do the most rudimentary way of manually transferring moves between two boards.
Having said that, most cheaters are easy to catch, chess.com has methods. TacticalTrickyKnight's claim (even if it had come from someone competent enough to know how to count) of having played 100s of cheaters here is ridiculous.
This is usually when they lock the topic and refer you to the cheating discussion group: https://www.chess.com/club/cheating-forum
but their CEO is busy breaking the TOS in the OP so we'll see 
Dec 14, 2017
0
#92
afrine wrote:
i play on other sites, but over all none compare to this site, i would never question someone
smart enough to build a site like chess.com
You must be new around here...
I would never question someone??? We are chess players, its our business to question everything and falsify it through the application of deductive logic.
Dec 14, 2017
0
#94
like President Nixon said, "if the president does it, that means its not illegal".
Dec 14, 2017
0
#95
RonaldJosephCote wrote:
Stop making accusations that Erik is breaking the TOS.
It's not an accusation, it's an observable fact.
The rest of your post doesn't disagree with that fact, it's just excusing it.
For the record, I'm not some legalistic sheep. Rules (and laws for that matter) are never made with the idea that they're correct in 100% of cases. If Erik wants to break them that's fine with me. Doesn't mean I wont rib him for it.
Dec 14, 2017
0
#96
Lets be honest about this...Its Erik's site. Its an internet website. Erik can do whatever he wants. Your precious "rights" do not exist here.
Now start another "petition"
Dec 14, 2017
0
#97
No one mentioned rights, and I defended Erik's decision.
Let's be honest, most people online can't read or make a decent argument.
Dec 14, 2017
0
#98
You've been around forever RJC, I like you. I don't know this fish guy though 
Dec 14, 2017
0
#99
After being bombarded by ads/pop-ups supporting net neutrality in too many sites, I can only think about all the headaches they have induced.
well, well, well his account got closed
I re-opened it. It wasn't supposed to be closed.
It was closed for possession of multiple accounts. #60.
Looks like @erik and @Werwer119 missed my post about multiple accounts - thanks for pointing that out, @EoGuel.
Although @Ouims was created before @TacticalTrickyKnight, it doesn't seem to have played as many games, so I guess that actually makes more sense to leave TTK open and close the other, which I have done now.