Priority should be given to paying members

So recently, I've been losing some games due to the database overload. Even when I'm not playing a match, I sometimes get database overloads while doing puzzles/lessons, which is pretty annoying. I feel that since I am paying for a membership on chess.com, they should be giving the paying members like me priority to the site first before the non paying members. 

It's a valid point, but I like the idea of having a website where everyone can play regardless of their ability to pay. To some people, the membership fee is easily affordable, whereas to others it's a fortune. A website that's inclusive is preferable, IMO, to a two-tiered system based on wealth.

The priority should be to increase server capacity ASAP.

Paying members already have access to features that non-paying members cannot access... that's the whole point of paid memberships. What exactly do you mean by "priority to the site"? Kicking out all non-paying members so there is less load on the database server for the paying members is a terrible idea... and a great way to damage the game of chess as a whole. @Kbz10troy has it right, the priority should be on acquiring server resources that can handle at least 50% more than the current load. To my knowledge, that's exactly what Chess.com is working on.

If you had read the recent update, you would have seen that Chess.com has been restricting the access of non-premium members during peak times.

https://www.chess.com/blog/CHESScom/an-update-regarding-our-server

Paying customers are already getting way more content than non-paying customers, AND when the servers are crashing badly "freeloaders" get shut out completely so the premium members can play. It's a bad idea AND chess.com is already doing it. Complaining that you aren't getting enough privileges doesn't make sense and is greedy.

Gold = VIP

Platinum = VVIP

Diamond = VVVIP

Non-Premium = NVIP

It's a great idea.  If they have to shut out some users when the server is near or at full capacity, the free members should get shut out first.  And I'm saying that as a free member.

Welcome new users. Now go away.

You mean like https://www.chess.com/blog/CHESScom/an-update-regarding-our-server as mentioned by @justbefair

Well, I don't think it's fair that paying members get kicked from the site while playing a match and lose rating. I understand that the site may not be able to handle the load, however we're the ones funding the site, and helping them get the resources, hence we should be getting priority. If a non-paying member who uses chess.com gets to use the site while a paying member who helps chess.com pay for their expenses gets kicked, that's not fair right? 

Most likely wrong. I expect Chess.com gets just as much money from premium member as advertisers give to show ads to non-premium members. Chess.com makes money off 'users' not premium members per se. Thus its within their interests to see maximum users possible, so new servers to manage the new load would be their number one priority,

I sincerely hope you are right. Perhaps Chesscom, in the spirit of fairness to all users, should consider denying access to free accounts that have detectable ad blockers running.

I expect this is really the case for gold members. They probably make more from platinum and diamond members, hence their incentives to promote uses to upgrade to diamond. - aside from the obvious benifit of diamond for chess.com being that users pay roughly double a gold account with not really any benefits. 

Benefits for the users I mean. I get unlimited analysis and more than enough puzzles. Only thing I miss I think is videos which I wouldn't come to chess.com for anyway.

To answer your question. I don't think chess.com really cares. The numbers would be a minority and they tell the ad companies they have 70 million users (at a guess). Whether those users actually see those ads isn't chess.com's problem until the ad companies complain. Which they won't as most ad companies are pretty much fully automated, and they run their ads on thousands of websites.

Don't think they'll ever make this move. It's bad press and not good to encourage advertisers and sponsors. Don't forget, the vast majority of players are not premium so catering to a negligable minority like this doesn't make buisness sense.

Chess.com wants new users. People who have very recently joined the site are the ones they will look to be looking after. They're not interested in a long standing premium member. He'll likely just put up with the temporary annoyances and weather the storm. Its the guy who joined 2 days ago that's likely to get annoyed for not having a game and will just leave. 

Also don't forget, he's potental for a new lucrative diamond account if they can get him to stay. Mr gold member from 2015 will likely never upgrade. 

Confound your arcanery! You're right!

Ad companies have built into their ads a marker that detects ad blockers and will only pay Chesscom for ads that are not blocked by ad blockers.

But there is also another type of parasite account that Chesscom could be used for and that is Click Farming.  A Click Farm is a workforce whose job it is to click on ads for their employer, (the Farmer). A Farmer pays users to click certain ads in order to drain advertising budgets.

But perhaps you are correct, Chesscom may not care.