The invites have already been sent!
So what exactly are the rules about discussing other chess sites?
Sort:
Jun 26, 2018
0
#47
2,4,6,8
Hog in, don't wait!
Hope I am not a boar.
Obelix would love this. In fact, he may be the IM's supply sauce.
YAY IMB !!! 
Jun 26, 2018
0
#50
To get to my home Casa Pancetta Affumicata.
You will take the Sir Francis Bacon freeway to Frying Pan Road. Take Frying Pan Road to Farfrompoopen Road. Take a right, and go about 4 miles until you come to the corner of This Way, and That Way. Hang a left a Bacon Way. If you come to Pork Rind Alley, you have gone to far. Back up and just start sniffing, youll find it.
That corner sounds familiar...
Jun 26, 2018
0
#53
Baked Necks: Popular Strine breakfast dish, as are Emma Necks, Scremblex, and Fright Chops
Jun 26, 2018
0
#54
camter wrote:
Baked Necks: Popular Strine breakfast dish, as are Emma Necks, Scremblex, and Fright Chops
MMMMM...I coat my pork chops in ground up pork rinds, and fry em in bacon grease.
Jun 26, 2018
0
#55
CoffeeAnd420 wrote:
MGleason wrote:
The other thread was posted to criticise another site. Even if the original post doesn't directly mention chess.com, the positive comparison is implied, and a post like that will inevitably lead to comments that discuss the relative merits of the different sites.
If you want to post about something chess.com does well, feel free to do so. If you want to post about something chess.com does poorly and could do better, that's fine too. If you want chess.com to implement a feature you saw on another site, you can post that too - but by describing the feature, rather than saying "please copy [insert competitor site name here]!"
Feedback about chess.com - positive or negative - is welcome (although you must do penance for any negative feedback by staring at @jdcannon's profile picture for five minutes), but if you want to discuss the relative merits of the different sites, Reddit would be a good place for that conversation.
Note: I didn't make the rules. However, I understand why Erik doesn't want his site to be used to advertise competitors or to have arguments over which site is best (a rather subjective matter, anyway).
Erik is out of touch w/ reality. There is no other website out there that disallows you from discussing other websites like it simply because the admin doesn't want anyone to find out about the other site's "merits" whatsoever. That's just ridiculous and obviously the guy has some kind of personal issues since he views this as "advertisement". It's some weird, bizarre, odd sticking point with the guy that no other human being who has ever lived has possessed. I guess they broke the mold when they made Erik.
Erik's behavior is most definitely weird, strange, and even concerning. That he harbors this delusional paranoia about other websites being "advertised" on his is ...again: Odd indeed.
I like to diss on Erik, but this rule makes sense to me.
No other site (AFAIK) has an active forum.
In fact because of the URL some people seem to mistake chess.com as some kind of hub for everything chess and will innocently ask about competitor sites not knowing they're chess.com's competitors.
Sure topics start out innocently, but lets say they're allowed to grow and grow. If I'm CEO of a competitor site I'm going to hop in and say stuff. Maybe I even say some inflammatory things to get the topic closed. Then I'll rant about how chess.com is playing favorites because the other topic about a 2nd competitor didn't get closed.
So either way, if controversy rages or if the topic grows and grows with polite conversation, it's just more and more attention to competitor sites. So IMO it's a good rule to disallow such topics completely.
Jun 26, 2018
0
#56
CoffeeAnd420 wrote:
1) The other sites do have active forums/chat rooms.
2) Obviously Erik's objective wasn't quite achieved. We're sitting here discussing all of the other sites at length in yet another thread due to his policy. The simple fact that we're not naming them is only going to encourage people to go Google them I don't know about that man. My opinion of people is pretty low. I'm not sure whether most people would even think of that as long as they're content here. and find out more about the slew of other sites out there than they ever would have otherwise. It doesn't matter what Erik's rationale or reasoning is - It's flawed in this case and it's just been proven. His objective was to NOT draw attention away from Chess.com and onto the other sites. He didn't want Chess.com used for that purpose. So what did he get: More discussion about it than ever. Clearly, he doesn't know what he's doing. More than ever? A few scattered topics where the names are hardly even mentioned? Naa, this isn't "more than ever" it'is nearly zero.
There have been huge threads on other forums about why Chess.com is afraid of anyone on their site knowing about any other chess site. The cat is totally out of the bag on this one and at this point, Erik's just being thick and stubborn.
I assume it's because Erik is a businessman, and so he's greedy. Clicks and google hits = money, so the fewer for his competitors the better for him.
oh boo hoo!
Jun 26, 2018
0
#58
So im thinking of stopping at the store tomorrow and getting some pork sausage, just as a change of pace.
Jun 26, 2018
0
#59
But if my site is #2 or #3, yeah, maybe I want competitors to be mentioned, maybe that will get me more google hits and clicks.
And if I'm a competitor, I don't really care if chess.com is mentioned because it's just the word "chess." i.e. it's not going to increase the hits for chess.com (at least not the way it would for a competitor if they're mentioned here)
Thanks for the warning, but you are only saying that, aren't you?