Don't do anything
What to do with users who ARE rude.
Sort:
Dec 6, 2014
0
#43
Actually his name was "digging-a-hole" that's where the "a-hole" came from. I hope everyone understood that. It was meant more as a joke than an insult.
Sure it's hard to know sometimes where to draw the line. Some people can use foul language in a "nice" way. And you can also insult without using profanities. But most of the time I think both know when something isn't well intentioned and something is more than just a tease. And if they created a report-button next to the comments on peoples walls, I don't think that it would be used in a bad way to "bring down" or ban innocent guys. And if it was used that way people could easily avoid it next time by not writing anything at all on anyones wall.
Start a petition for chess boxing to be included as part of chess.com's offered services.... of course most of the rude cowards here would run from such an invitation. 
It would be great, Houdini has no answer for a nicely timed liver punch...
America_de_Cali wrote:
Crying has nothing to do with it. Just seems logical. If someone throws insults around him to everyone he's chatting with, why ask the 100 or 1000 people they come across to block him? Isn't it easier to just filter out the language or report the person responsible. Restrict 1 user instead of asking everyone around him to block him.
Well. maybe not that easy to filter. I am pretty sure the chat function will block me or warn me if I write without symbols "Go **** yourself" But I can misspell it half a dozen ways or more. How about " Go * * * * Yourself." This would be much harder to filter since we are now talking about letters not words. Maybe not insurmountable with the write coding so:
"Go
*
*
*
*
Yourself."
See the problem? I am barely trying and only being rude in engish.
So, the easy solution is to allow members to block idiots which makes sense since insults are personal anyway so deal with it on a personal level and refrain from turning chess.com into a nanny state.
As an aside, rudeness can be quite subjective as well. I once had an opponent take offense at 'gg' because in his language it was similar to the sound of 'ha ha'
Troll them, thats why i do. I got some Indian guy telling me in Hindi that i am this and I am that (too distasteful to actually repeat with various references to my sister and mother) , little did he realise that i can understand Hindi/Urdu so i mocked him and he became mad and lost the plot and the game, it was joyous. Some other guy started to tell my how much i suck at chess, I had to agree with him because its true but then I beat up on him and mocked him, again it was joyous. People say that you shouldn't feed trolls, i disagree, they should be counter trolled so that Karma will be helped to get them and bring them to their senses.
Dec 6, 2014
0
#48
Having a 'report' option with block is hardly a nanny state. People get too obsessed by nanny state stuff. It just allows cretins to have some sensible consequences for their actions.
As far as I am aware chess.com is not a site aimed only at adults either. I neither have children nor like them so that aspect doesn't really bother me personally, but it isn't good to just have an accepting attitude of it on a chess site.
I had an opponent wish me and my family dead on my notess page after a game I played against him. Didn't bother me particularly, I just blocked him, but it would have been nice to see his account get deleted and if I were a younger member I might have found it more disturbing.
Dec 6, 2014
0
#49
What do I have to do OP, take a personal insult to you to get you to respond?
America_de_Cali wrote:
Thanks a-hole (lol)
Now your response is intelligent and concurrent with your rating
Just as the moronic answer from the previous poster is concurrent with her rating
What was your burning motivation to to start a thread in order to publicly demonstrate that you're a jerk?
_Number_6 wrote:
America_de_Cali wrote:
Crying has nothing to do with it. Just seems logical. If someone throws insults around him to everyone he's chatting with, why ask the 100 or 1000 people they come across to block him? Isn't it easier to just filter out the language or report the person responsible. Restrict 1 user instead of asking everyone around him to block him.
Well. maybe not. I am pretty sure the chat function will block me or warn me if I write without symbols "Go **** yourself" But I can misspell it half a dozen ways or more. How about " Go * * * * Yourself." This would be much harder to filter since we are now talking about letters not words. Maybe not insurmountable with the write coding so:
"Go
*
*
*
*
Yourself."
See the problem? I am barely trying and only being rude in engish.
So, the easy solution is to allow members to block idiots which makes sense since insults are personal anyway so deal with it on a personal level and refrain from turning chess.com into a nanny state.
As an aside, rudeness can be quite subjective as well. I once had an opponent take offense at 'gg' because in his language it was similar to the sound of 'ha ha'
Perhaps if ISP's were required by law to disclose whether or not an IP address was public and if institutions who were using computers to serve the public had to have some sort of software, that generated a new mac address specifically assigned and reused for each user who logged in, it would give sites like Chess.com more leverage in simply banning abusive users via IP addy or mac address ?
However, I doubt that our inconvenience will spark any sudden changes in the laws, especially with uniformity or globally...
...oh yeah and those damned proxy servers....
I neither have children nor like them so that aspect doesn't really bother me personally, but it isn't good to just have an accepting attitude of it on a chess site.
You dont like children??? wow say it aint so, were you not also a child once? did you not also like to play and talk nonsense and believe in stuff that wasn't real? I never had a baby sitter for my kids ever, If i was going out to a restaurant i took them with me, people used to love the little bambinos. Seriously people that don't like kids freak me out.
glamdring27 wrote:
Having a 'report' option with block is hardly a nanny state.
Agreed. A report button would not be. I think having a computer filtering chat is.
Dec 6, 2014
0
#54
Well behaved kids are fine. Badly behaved kids are not, but that was more of a throwaway comment aside to the main point. I'm allowed to both not like (general) kids, but still think there should be efforts made to make a chess site friendly towards them (unless they are offended by people not liking children!!)
robbie_1969 wrote:
Troll them,..., it was joyous.
Agreed!
glamdring27 wrote:
Well behaved kids are fine. Badly behaved kids are not, but that was more of a throwaway comment aside to the main point. I'm allowed to both not like (general) kids, but still think there should be efforts made to make a chess site friendly towards them (unless they are offended by people not liking children!!)
Of course no one is questioning your rights and yes badly behaved kids are annoying, perhaps your perspective will change if you ever decide to have kids yourself.
_Number_6 wrote:
robbie_1969 wrote:
Troll them,..., it was joyous.
Agreed!
:D
Dec 6, 2014
0
#58
Explain this in more detail.
Additionally, you can always take screenshots, then send support a ticket. I've done this and it did work. Until then, just learn to ignore it. Getting upset over it is not going to help you.
What did you want me to explain? The report-button thing? Well if you had a report button next to the comments on your wall, it could be used on normal comments as well if you have a grudge on someone who has beaten you for instance. However if that funcion is used to attack or ban better rated players, these players could easily avoid that by not writing anything at all on ppls walls afterwards.
And about the screenshot, ticket-thing I've never tried, but it seems like it's too much work for something that is too common on here. But I won't judge until I've seen it myself. The report thing should be more accesible I think and if possible automated.
Dec 6, 2014
0
#59
glamdring27 wrote:
Having a 'report' option with block is hardly a nanny state. People get too obsessed by nanny state stuff. It just allows cretins to have some sensible consequences for their actions.
As far as I am aware chess.com is not a site aimed only at adults either. I neither have children nor like them so that aspect doesn't really bother me personally, but it isn't good to just have an accepting attitude of it on a chess site.
I had an opponent wish me and my family dead on my notess page after a game I played against him. Didn't bother me particularly, I just blocked him, but it would have been nice to see his account get deleted and if I were a younger member I might have found it more disturbing.
I agree on everything in this post. Couldn't have said it better myself. Just ban or deduct points from every guy that gets 5 or 10 reports on him. That way you'd know that it's no coincidence if the guy has offended so many people and he will be correctly banned.
America_de_Cali, I just looked up your avatar and I see it's a logo for some sports team and not, in fact the insult it seems to be on the surface. So, I owe you an apology for jumping at that implication. I do find the sports logo suspect however. But at the same time, it's completely reasonable not to think that what happens in a private exchange should be aired in the public forums.
Must be a devil manigance.