In case you're wondering why the number of members jumped...

Chess.com could send the details of your new, transient chess.com login to your Facebook account. Then if you elect to merge the two accounts, only you will have the necessary access permissions to the transient account.

Sounds impressive! Great job!

And if I don't elect to merge the two accounts, what happens?

a) I have two accounts on chess.com -- against the rules.

b) My old facebook account goes away. How do I play with people I know on facebook?

a)  But I'm sure the hope/desire here is that you *do* elect to merge the two accounts.  In fact, the process does its utmost to ensure that it happens - for instance if you hit the application from a browser where you're already logged into Chess.com, your FB and Chess.com email addresses are a match, etc.  (Actually, I'd better steer clear of the technical details here or I'm just going to become a well of misinformation...)  Anyway, again, the hope is that the accounts merge, just as the hope is that people don't wilfully create multiple chess.com accounts using the main site too.  It's not bullet-proof, but it's not dropping our pants either, compared to things as they've been all along.

b) I don't get this one, I guess.  Why does your FB account go away?

i am pretty sure we merge them if we detect that you login with the same email address since we can't have the same email address twice. otherwise it is a choice (though again, we recommend you merge).

your friends will be transfered with everything else. 

who said live chess won't be in facebook after this release!? (surprise!!)

The only really smart account matching is by validated email address... matching ip-addresses and checking for double login on a browser both sound extremely dubious and error prone.

correct

I should have put an OR between the a) and b) scenarios. I will wind up with 2 accounts OR one will go away.

I understand it is your hope and desire that all the accounts merge. But you've stated it is a user choice. My question is what happens if a user decides not to merge? You can't answer that question with "we hope the user merges."

I use facebook with people I know in real life. I share some of my real personal information there (and use the privacy settings accordingly). I use chess.com with people I don't know in real life. I share almost no real personal information here. I like that I can have a chess gamevia the internet  with someone I know in real life and have a personal relationship with. I also like that I can find all kinds of people I don't know and play them over the internet. I don't want to mix these two things together.

Chess.com members to whom you have no social-networking connection will not have any more access to information about you than they ever did.  The change here is that Facebook friends are becoming Chess.com members (whether they ever come here or not is still up to them), not the other way 'round.

As far as I can tell, the only change you'll have to accommodate on this front is that your true friends and your mere opponents will all be on the same list (in both places).

Loomis:

One thing driving all of this is that Facebook is slowly downplaying and getting rid of "apps". They are pushing more to put facebook elements on other sites (like chess.com) rather than have sites like chess.com build apps for their site. So it's an inevitability that this happens - our hand will be forced at some point and we decided to integrate sooner rather than later when we have the energy and forsight to thoughtfully do it rather than be rushed into it. 

Unless you are doing something BAD, there is no reason we would have a problem with your accounts like that. But it isn't technically permitted. 

Check out sites like YELP or DIGG or any other site where you have the option to connect with facebook. We will have those same options - or not, your choice. But the overwhelming voice of chess players is to MERGE, and facebook's own policies are pushing to MERGE. 

I know it won't please everyone, but we have never been able to please everyone. Sorry :(

wow!!!, looks like this internet stuff is going to be around for a long time...i remember the time before the internet and online chess.  Just thinking outloud here.

I Agree with stats-man! I had noticed the jump in membership, so does that mean I have two accounts now at chess.com as i had one in FB oh I see I can merge them (GOOD). Hmm! Didn't play (chess.com) much at FB as do at chess.com Well we''ll soon see what this does besides increasing the membership count. Keep us informed!

Paco

LOL.  Yeah, I remember when we had a shack set up on the Information Super Highway back when it was still a dirt road.    We were called "Bulletin Board Systems" back then, and you had to call our computer directly to access the site (mine was called "Vampire Junction").  So the BBSes either had to have a 2nd phone line in their house dedicated solely to their computer, or they were only "open" during certain hours.  My how times have changed.    No longer do I answer the phone and hear a high pitched screeching and say to the computer, "It's for you." 

Glad to hear the whole IP address isn't being considered, cuz I log in to Chess.com from at least 4 different computers, and I've got at least 4 different family members who could be logging on from any one of those same computers.  The email thing makes WAY more sense.

I'm running out of fingers to count all the new members!

so if someone has an account on both, it's counted double and it's allowed?

oh so that's why the percentiles are out of whack...

It's good to hear that chess.com has many players registered, but I really suspect that many of them are not playing actively. Would you please clarify for me: are inactive players included in the count or not?

Is there a policy of removing players from the counter after a period of inactivity, like freezing the account, etc?

Suppose one finds self rated better than 90% of all players. Does it mean that he/she is capable to win against 9 out of 10 players on an open tournament? I won't elaborate further here, but just want to emphasize that this 9 out of 10 observation is not true if inactive players are included in the counter.

What are the rules for including someone as an active member? I know that question has been asked many times, but I was not able to find an answer from the staff.

Great job with this site.

I did too! Haha, funny, it's only now that I remember that that is how I found chess.com.

At any rate, I'm happy that this has bumped me up into being better than about 90% of chess.com members right now :D