talking to me ?
Why the 200 block limit?
Sort:
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Another thing I will never understand is why so many people take pride in not blocking anyone. Why? If someone is being a jerk to you, the best and easiet solution is to just block them. Done. Over with. History.
Are you talking to me? I take pride in not blocking anyone because I don't believe in a filtered experience. But I made this decision when the blocker would not see content from the blockee in threads. It just seemed rather stupid to auto-filter out people's content, just so that I could prevent them from posting in my threads, or from sending me messages.
As you may know, I also have a zero block list at Sleator's site and Sleator's free offshoot site. But hey, everyone's entitled to their own, right?
You're WRONG about the blocker not seeing content from the blockee in threads. The only thing that happens happens when you block someone is they are not able to post in your threads. They can read them all they want. Also of course you can see each other's content in other threads.
Sep 8, 2011
0
#44
woodshover, I think it used to be the other way. Right now I am aware that it is how you say.
ozzie_c_cobblepot wrote:
woodshover, I think it used to be the other way. Right now I am aware that it is how you say.
Okay. I was blocked over a year ago, and it was this way, but I don't know about before then.
[COMMENT DELETED]
Sep 9, 2011
0
#47
sftac wrote:
Why should the site limit its members to sane people? Money's money, and helps turn the wheels here.
I didn't say anything about what the site should do.
Well, as I block everyone who shows impolite attitude, not only verbal abuse but also losing on time one move before checkmate, trying to win on time king + rook vs. king+rook, and so on, I guess I am over 100 blocks (not sure).
Does that makes me antisocial ?
The way to go over the 200 block mark seems crystal clear to me : I just have to play a lot and on different hours. Will anyone claim there can't be 200 jerks on that site ?
Sep 9, 2011
0
#49
I think it would be nice to be able to have a Like button at the end of people's posts like they have on facebook or on reviews...so that way you don't have to create a whole post just to say you like someone's post.
Sep 9, 2011
0
#50
Or set the block limit at 50.
And if you reach that number you get a free shipment of chill pills to deal with the anger issues.
Blocking should only be done in the most extreme circumstances. checkmateibeatu, I have seen you block someone for voting for an opening move you didn't like on your Hurt/Heal opening moves thread.
I'd say that if 200 people have resorted to abusing you (this is aimed at anyone) that you must have deliberately done something to irritate. Or else you're just blocking people for taking, say, the opposing side in an discussion, and defending their point vehemently.
Sep 9, 2011
0
#52
The reason for the block is technical. At one point in the history of the site, there were folks blocking literally 1000s of other players, and it was causing technical issues with the site, especially with Live Chess. When one of these players tried to enter Live Chess, it would literally bring the server down for everyone, so they implimented this limit.
But, truthfully, if you feel you need to block more than 200 folks, then perhaps YOU are the problem, not those other folks.
echecs06 wrote:
Why are people so rude to you and not others?
They are to others too.
In fact they are not even rude, just impolite. I do not want to waste my time, I just want to play chess. Maybe some people like to wait 5 min. when they could checkmate at the next move without any hesitation, but I don't.
My blocking is not a punishment, that's just to prevent them to play against me again and make me lose even more time.
Sep 9, 2011
0
#54
Irontiger wrote:
echecs06 wrote:
Why are people so rude to you and not others?
They are to others too.
In fact they are not even rude, just impolite. I do not want to waste my time, I just want to play chess. Maybe some people like to wait 5 min. when they could checkmate at the next move without any hesitation, but I don't.
My blocking is not a punishment, that's just to prevent them to play against me again and make me lose even more time.
That person probably blocked you too because you didn't give up.
Sep 9, 2011
0
#55
AfafBouardi wrote:
I think it would be nice to be able to have a Like button at the end of people's posts like they have on facebook or on reviews...so that way you don't have to create a whole post just to say you like someone's post.
+1!!!!!!!!!!
Sep 9, 2011
0
#56
i've been on chess playing sites and forums for a long, long time. if you have trouble with more than 200 people, the problem is you, not them. period.
-waller- wrote:
Blocking should only be done in the most extreme circumstances. checkmateibeatu, I have seen you block someone for voting for an opening move you didn't like on your Hurt/Heal opening moves thread.
I'd say that if 200 people have resorted to abusing you (this is aimed at anyone) that you must have deliberately done something to irritate. Or else you're just blocking people for taking, say, the opposing side in an discussion, and defending their point vehemently.
That move was none other than the move that is considered to be the worst, 1.f3. If I was gonna make a real survey of that, the only choice was to block them.
AfafBouardi wrote:
I think it would be nice to be able to have a Like button at the end of people's posts like they have on facebook or on reviews...so that way you don't have to create a whole post just to say you like someone's post.
+Like
checkmateibeatu wrote:
-waller- wrote:
Blocking should only be done in the most extreme circumstances. checkmateibeatu, I have seen you block someone for voting for an opening move you didn't like on your Hurt/Heal opening moves thread.
I'd say that if 200 people have resorted to abusing you (this is aimed at anyone) that you must have deliberately done something to irritate. Or else you're just blocking people for taking, say, the opposing side in an discussion, and defending their point vehemently.
That move was none other than the move that is considered to be the worst, 1.f3. If I was gonna make a real survey of that, the only choice was to block them.
Just because its considered to be worst (is it??) doesn't mean it doesn't have its advocates. Honestly. f3 likely would have been voted out early anyway since not many people are gonna vote for it. A "real" survey will always have minority groups in that vote for obscure options! Personally I have won a game with 1...h6 against 1.d4 and have a 100% record with that opening. Great move.
Sep 9, 2011
0
#60
checkmateibeatu wrote:
-waller- wrote:
Blocking should only be done in the most extreme circumstances. checkmateibeatu, I have seen you block someone for voting for an opening move you didn't like on your Hurt/Heal opening moves thread.
I'd say that if 200 people have resorted to abusing you (this is aimed at anyone) that you must have deliberately done something to irritate. Or else you're just blocking people for taking, say, the opposing side in an discussion, and defending their point vehemently.
That move was none other than the move that is considered to be the worst, 1.f3. If I was gonna make a real survey of that, the only choice was to block them.
there is no such thing as real survey here in the forum.
Well, what do you want to be, a blockhead?
OHH BURRRNN!!!!
...#fail.