erik, we are frustrated

happy trails, this topic is not about any political slant. do not go there.  if you want to discuss politics, there are many groups for that. 

but, you knew that, right? 

please stay on topic.

I think that's the whole point. It's not free speech, and it doesnt appear anyone who works at chess.com has any interest in making it free speech. Sure Al is right, they dont really care about members concerns, but you have to look at it from their point of view. You will conduct speech in the manner they approve of, or else. Period. It's not about free speech because it's a private entity. They can restrict any speech they want. Addressing "member concerns" isn't on the radar because there is no reason for it to be. As long as it's profitable, and the people who operate chess.com are happy, that's all that matters. No reason to do something above or beyond that.

   I agree with PG on the free speech thing but all businesses survive on customer feedback. Is Erik continually shooting himself in the foot?? The reason I ask is because most people think that a membership of 32 million is impressive. It may be but had lines of communication stayed open, it might have been 100 million by now. Al's complaints are legit. The upper admins have no interplay with the customers. Jimmy Kay's..."If Your Missing A Thread" is gone. We rarely see any Staff in the forums anymore. Without David, even Community Defenders is dysfunctional. Batgirl does her best destroying accounts associated with drmrboss. At some point in time, you'll want to shut down "help & support" completely. I'm just saying if you want to go the way of Sears & Roebucks.......then you're on the right track.

Don't forget that it's a small minority of chess.com members that are active on the forums.  It's a smaller minority than it should be due to the status quo, but even if the forums were a chess-related dreamland of interesting civil discourse, it would still be a minority of total members active here.

" A Chess-related Dreamland" 

The primary way to get support is through tickets. According to the last three month in review articles, support staff average over 12,000 interactions a month. 

https://www.chess.com/news/view/chess-com-month-in-review-december-2019

Could there be a more prominent staff presence in the forums? Most certainly. But to say addressing member concerns "isn't on the radar" is a bit disingenuous.

What's more, what he mentioned is anything but quixotic.

La Mancha has spoken!

  You may be right Socks......most members are content with having this up for 30 days....https://www.chess.com/forum/view/game-showcase/accused-of-cheating-1?page=1

I'm just going by the complaints, concerns, and frustration voiced here. I assume they are genuine. Actions speak so much louder than words. If the actions by chess.com did not create any problems for customers, why all the comments about ignoring concerns? Do you believe the complaints voiced here are disingenuous?

I'm just saying I get it. There can't practically be a solution that both keeps customers happy, and keeps chess.com operators happy. The satisfaction of chess.com operators must come first, otherwise there would not be a chess.com. That's business. I just laugh a little bit when I see people complaining that they dont have free speech here. I dont blame chess.com for not giving a flying fig what people want, as long as the business model works.

While I'm sympathetic to the topic in general, I have to laugh a little. There are actually a million games a day played here. If only 100 people are complaining it's evidence that chess.com's way of doing things is overwhelmingly liked... in fact impossibly well liked. There are surely more than 100 dissatisfied customers, most of them complaining by contacting support. I have to assume this topic accounts for less than 1% of dissatisfied customers.

I understand every vocal complainer represents x number of annoyed but silent customers, but if this topic is being held up as an example of alarm bells that's when I chuckle

When I first joined this site there were the forums, a few blogs and ... well, not much more, not even chess. The forums were very much in the spotlight. Then chess arrived. First Daily, followed a year or two later with Live.  Content was being added hand-over-fist but the forums were still the public face of chess.com.  Some years back things changed.  The site's become focused on chess tv and twitchy things I don't care about or even understand.  That focus, however,  relegated the forums to the attic or the basement, wherever memories go to die.  Not only are the forums a place that only a teeny tiny percent of members frequent,  it's an out-of-site-out-of-mind place for the admin.  The point isn't that people don't have issues or even that management doesn't care, but rather that the forums have become disconnected from that process.  The forums are just an appendix awaiting removal.

well recent studies have shown the appendix to be a safe house of good gut bacteria and part of the immune system.  please do not ask the bunny what any of that means.  all the bunny understands is that his favorite "get out my way you appendix" insult is no longer relevant.

   ---   Some very good points ! I'm in the Geezers club and I hardly ever see any of those folks spend time here in the open threads ( and yet retired folks do have extra spare time  lol ). 

but how could one possibly be satisfied with unjustified auto-warnings & auto-mutes?  lack of features is 1 thing but existence of functionality-disabling bugs is another.  the bunny has been auto-muted thrice and auto-warned once for no reason and as accepted by chess.com staff.  the op has also highlighted his inability to challenge "protected" players.

i will look past that the link is an obvious advertisement for the site....

"interactions" does not mean results. it *could* mean the auto-generated replies of "thank you, we'll look into it" are counted. i can remember instances where staff did not respond to my queries, so i don't think the statistic itself is evidence of anything, really.

topics about concerns allow others with similar issues to voice them in an arena that, in my opinion, might be better for staff (and mods) to grasp the issue. people like you and betty are well aware that sometimes what seems like a baffling issue for some has a simple solution-i've seen you both help others this way. 

this topic has highlighted site issues that are not the result of people simply needing to clear their cache.  i think it would be more of a hassle for staff if everyone sent in a ticket when being shut out of live games as some have mentioned here.  

really?  can a dev do whatever they want?  can anyone become a dev on chess.com?

*can't fight the spongey assimilation*

Too many cooks spoil the soup.