If I owned this site I would want to know why the OP is dissatisfied as a member. For myself, however, my response would be: "Ok." There really isn't anything to debate here, one individual not liking the same things as another isn't necessarily an indictment of anyone.
Debate Thread leads to multiple casualty event.
"Chess.com sucks!"
I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt - even when I disagree with them.
In this case, I find that people who complain about chess.com - while still hanging out here - are probably just frustrated. They like the site, but there are things about it they wish would change ...
if you cheat, you are far more likely to get caught here... that is in fact the third or fourth most common complaint about Lichess, that they are not always or generally very responsive to cheating reports.
So true. There is a percentage of life's players who cheat and a percentage who complains. Such is life. I get messages sometimes that points have been added back. So move on and roll with it.
"There is a percentage of life's players who cheat and a percentage who complains."
...And they tend to be the same group,
Have you ever been in a forum of insanity before? I have (I'm not one of those who has been acting insane in those forums, thankfully, I stay calm and collected). One of the most insane forums I've seen is the forum of a dude that was going insane over chess. (Chess straight up possessing and influencing him to the point that he declared his self-worth to chess). I've been supportive though. Let me know if you have been in a forum in a same of higher level of insanity than the one I said.
oui
Ok here is the link to that insanity forum I was talking about. Let me know what you think of this: https://www.chess.com/forum/view/for-beginners/why-am-i-so-removed-stupid-can-someone-explain-what-is-wrong-with-my-brain-111576778
Too much obvious cheater and way too slow process removing them from the community, but when you use some **** words you done almost immedately. The ban bcs of cheating should be by mainboard to make it harder to get back.
Too much obvious cheater and way too slow process removing them from the community, but when you use some **** words you done almost immedately. The ban bcs of cheating should be by mainboard to make it harder to get back.
1 - Any cheating is "too much cheating".
2 - Obvious cheating is extremely rare, just as one would expect. How many cheaters are there who happen to be morons as well? When people say it's obvious, it mostly just means they're convinced, but humans, even Masters, are actually very bad at cheat detection (again, aside from stupid/ obvious cheating). They mostly look at winning streaks and accuracy. Chess.com's detection system looks at both when deciding what needs further investigation, but considers both completely worthless in making any final determination. Anomalies happen. Continuously flip a coin and every now and then you'll get heads five times in a row. Instead they look at all of a player's recent games, then look for behavior, patterns... to a degree not possible for a human being, to see if there is anything, often many things, that cannot be explained without reference to cheating.
3 - Unless chess.com starts requiring identification, it is completely impossible to prevent banned users from creating new accounts. Choose a new username, get a new email addess, turn on your VPN... bang, five minutes and you're in. They don't even require a phone number. They ask but don't require. It's been proposed that at least a verifiable phone number should be mandatory (and no, not a dime-a-dozen VoIP number), or proof of address (they would snail mail you a card, with a one-time login code). Some have suggested even more.... a governent ID number, for example. Without question, that would put a huge dent in all forms of abuse, not just cheating. spamming for example. The problem is that way too many players, possibly myself included, would just say, "Oh, hell no", and truck on over to Lichess, first choice or not.
"Chess.com sucks!"
I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt - even when I disagree with them.
In this case, I find that people who complain about chess.com - while still hanging out here - are probably just frustrated. They like the site, but there are things about it they wish would change ...
Of course. I'm not without sympathy for them. I avoided this subject like the plague for the longest time: "yes, I'm well-aware that some of us are scumbags/poor sports enough to cheat... ask me if I give a rat's butt". But then it seemed as though the cynics were winning the day and I very much agree with chess.com that an exaggerated view of the cheating problem can easily just make the problem worse: you even hear it often enough, usually (but not always) just by implication: "everyone else is cheating... why not me? I'm better than that, true, but why not even the playing field a bit." Even if it's not the intention, if you argue for the idea that half or more of us are cheaters, let's hope you don't win the day. Normalize cheating, which is what that could do, and it will be a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.
"Chess.com sucks!"
I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt - even when I disagree with them.
In this case, I find that people who complain about chess.com - while still hanging out here - are probably just frustrated. They like the site, but there are things about it they wish would change ...
I'd say that some are honest critics but most are not. There is plenty I myself would like to see changed. But there is often a kind of passion or just disdain in their tone and, when pressed, it almost always turns out that they feel they are lower-rated than they deserve to be.... and they blame chess.com, and cheaters, for this. It's the common factor with them. They aren't motivated by a desire to make chess.com better (do you ever see that with them? ha ha). They think it sucks, actually just claim to think that, because, yes, they vote with their feet... they're still here.
I play counterpoint to them not because it rocks my boat but because I don't mind and I truly think the chess.com haters have it all wrong.
Yep, they complain all day, stay all night, true dedication to whining like its a full time job?
The only problem I have with chess.com is that you can’t direct daily tournaments unless you have premium which seems kinda stupid but it’s a pretty minor thing
LONG LIVE HANS NIEMANN. WE STAND WITH YOU BRUTHA
You choose to post that here, why exactly? Because that self-admitted liar and cheat also thinks that "chess.com sucks"?
And you're a fan because... you relate to cheaters?
Oh well. Your mileage may vary.
On Reddit, the question was asked, "Will Niemann's new chess platform, Endgame.ai, be a success?"
Best answer:
@hotdog49 "If what you mean by 'success' is 'astonish the chess community with how gullible he thinks we are', then, yes, it will be a great success."
@IamAdamRhys The only reason I would purchase membership is so that I have access to Explorer. I can't think of any other reason why I would purchase it besides wanting to monetarily support Chess.com. Lessons, videos, puzzles are all useless to me. I study and invest my money in books and find those way more effective.
I like Explorer too. But I never do puzzles or lessons or any of that. And game review is kind of a joke. But it's not exactly expensive, so why not? It doesn't bother in the least that they (gasp!) they charge money for the full benefit.