No Naming/Shaming Rule

Been awhile since I complained about something so here goes:

Perhaps you've heard of the "no naming/shaming rule" here on Chess.com.

Essentially, you cant name someone you think is cheating, being abusive, or really say anything that would cast the person in a bad light. That's a rule, do it and your post will be edited.

Why?

If some guy uses his account to post some profane junk on my wall, then he should take responsiblilty and we should be able to quote him! I mean, if we're having a forum discussion, I'm allowed to quote someone and tell them they're wrong! If you post something, own up to it.

The rule doesn't make sense. If you post crap, be ready to be responsible for it. The mod's are essentially saying you can quote/name someone only if they posted something that isnt idiotic. Say wha?!?!

What say y'all? Dumb rule?

             Your skipping a step. Report it privately with the ticket. If its not cleared up within a day or 2, then name & shame.

I assume it's because so many people can't be trusted to announce to the community who they don't like, who they think are cheating, etc.

But seriously though, everytime someone shares what some jerk posted on their wall, why do they get in trouble? The guy posted on PUBLIC chess.com? Why is he protected?

      Addicted To Chess;  You & I grew up at a different time. Today, all the crooks have rights.

I see plenty of naming on the players notes in some cases the entire notes of that person when i decide if i want to play them in live chess.

One rationale behind the no naming and shaming rule that I can think of is, you could name and shame somebody for something totally made up. So if there's a guy who's known for being blunt in his word choice, and some guy that he offends decides to created a thread saying the guy sent him a pm where he called him a (insert insult here), then a lot of people would probably believe it, even though it's totally false.

         Macer's got a point;  The OOoLD false accusation trick. I haven't seen that trick since 1937.     Its just a joke!

Well, there was Joseph McCarthy, for one...

btw what event in 1937 r u referencing?

Kill the messanger and the message.

You have the power to delete their message.

They don't have the power to delete your thread.

If someone insults you in live chess you cant delete it, yet you cant name then still!

There've been countless cases of people incorrectly (not even maliciously) accusing people of things they didn't do here.  I've always thought the rule made sense, and chess.com appears to agree, but it's historically been a pretty contentious rule.

You can grow thicker skin.

Barring that you can ignore them

Barring that you can avoid them.

Barring that, you can block them.

Barring that, you can report them.

There are a lot of other avenues, aside from naming and shaming, to deal with this "problem".

Well false accusations should not be allowed for sure. But chess.com will know if it's true or not. I mean come on.

^Do not take this advice; it is not recommended by chess.com and you can and probably will get edited/warned/banned.

Reporting with a ticket is the correct course of action, but just wait for a response - they have good customer support here. It's never taken more than a day for me.

lol I agree with you whole heartedly, but the concept of not being alowed to quote someone who's speaking PUBLICLY just seems weird.

Chess.com doesn't want to have to check all such accusations.

If chess.com knows if it's true or not then shouldn't simply reporting them be sufficient?