Trolls should be banned from chess.com

Coolout was ok...just very longwinded and overly-verbose; his many arguments went around in circles. If Chess.com was the U.S. Congress, and the Forums were the legislature trying to pass a law/bill/regulation, etc., then essentially Coolout would be a "filibusterer"; a filibuster being a situation where a congressman literally talks to death a legislative action. This is a metaphor describing how Coolout so very often "talked to death" any point of debate in a given Forum topic, such as the infamous "Luck in Chess" posts...

Who was Coolout?

I do it at the end usually when they are dead lost. I don't want instant karma happening. I did struggle a lot against 1.d4 Sidelines so I read a GM Repertoire book on how to deal with them and I've been having a positive win streak against them. 

I mean sure you can try to ban their accounts but they come back with new accounts and multiple alts ready to be used when one of their accounts gets banned. It’s easy to say “Let’s ban trolls” but not so easy to actually ban them from this site.

Yeah I think I know who you are talking about but no public shaming even though it’s a troll. 

Even though the offical rule is "No-Naming-And-Shaming", nevertheless I've actually noticed a LOT of that here lately in the Forums, without the usual Moderator intervention-----you know, when a post has the green ink reading "edited by mod.", followed by the harangue about not doing any naming/shaming. So I wonder if this rule had now become a "blue law"...(meaning a law is still technically on the books, but one which is no longer actually enforced)...

It's all a bit silly now,whatever the original meaning of the word was, it has now become amongst other things, an insult.

So if someone does not like you, what you say, or some of your viewpoints, you are simply called a troll.

If you veer off the main topic, even for good reasons , likewise.

There are many on here who simply prefer to make harmless funny comments, no intent other than that, and yet they get called "trolls" also.

It is also seen in the main as a negative activity, trolling that is, but what if it amuses people and is devoid of any unpleasantness, is that a bad thing ?

The word is now rather meaningless and unhelpful, but that will not stop some using it as above will it ?

Troll simply means a joker who has fun provoking clash and posting stupid messages to be fed (because he is addicted to social networks and it is more easy to answer to stupid messages) 

Now the problem of this term is the amalgam very often made with cybercriminal and besides as character of fiction which is given for a troll it is the Joker. The Joker is not just a joker, he commits and causes to be committed criminal acts, he is first and foremost a criminal.

When a person called troll or not commits malicious acts such as cyber-harassment leading to suicides, death threats, uses the deepfake to humiliate or harm a person etc. he is above all a cybercriminal.

Soon all fun will be banned.

no u

To you maybe, mean that to everyone else then does it ?

And who says it is " taken part in solely for the mischief of bothering other individuals ..." ?

Only you methinks

Noo then lad, ya needs to up your game a bit here

Just follow my lead !

And get some mushy peas down thee !

That's them on the left, the fish and chips are all mine

Looks like prison food.

What are mushy peas made of ?

When mushy drinks too much water ...

Been there then have you pulpy