Bad Sportsmanship

Sort:
tooWEAKtooSL0W
[COMMENT DELETED]
ponz111

It may or may not work but it is worth a try. 

ponz111

Is there a way just to have a list of players like this for your own personal use so automatically you do not play them?

goldendog

I think the immaturity and pettiness quotients are too high here for the idea to float.

TheGrobe

Well surely all that's needed then is a secondary measure that ranks how abusive of the sportsmanship rating feature each of us is.

You're welcome.

RonaldJosephCote

      I love the idea, but your funny; "the nice people", and the "not so nice"

goldendog

@TheGrobe  Poifect!

tooWEAKtooSL0W

@ponz With so many hundreds of thousands of people who play on Chess.com, writing down their names one at a time probably wouldn't solve much, since it's unlikely that I'll ever play any of them again. Thanks for the suggestion though.

tooWEAKtooSL0W

@RonaldJosephCote The "niceness" rating would have to be hidden though; it would just be used in the algorithm for finding matches, not actually shown. That way no one complains about having a high/ low rating.

 

@TheGrobe haha good point. They would probably also need a tertiary rating to rate the players rating of how they rate players. Lol

RonaldJosephCote

      People who spam, swear, stall unnessasarily, go against each other!   IF ONLY IT WAS THAT SIMPLE!

neeker

It sucks, but it's something you have to deal with.  Kinda like real life, cheaters are out there everywhere.

However, I fully agree with your sportsmanship rating idea!  I don't know if it's practical to implement (I can't think how), but it might do something to help chess.com.  

RonaldJosephCote

      I know this is going to sound bad but, the not so pleasant people tend to be the ones who get the non-payng membership. Not ALLWAYS, but enought. Its a courtesy, I know. By law, you can't deny them membership, but even if they just bought a BASIC membership, you'd know that the're a little serious about chess.

bigbird419

I don't think it would work because some people might just rate you a one because they lost or something

Ubik42
RonaldJosephCote wrote:

      I know this is going to sound bad but, the not so pleasant people tend to be the ones who get the non-payng membership. Not ALLWAYS, but enought. Its a courtesy, I know. By law, you can't deny them membership, but even if they just bought a BASIC membership, you'd know that the're a little serious about chess.

Also, we are more handsome and dangerous around the ladies.

cleocamy

I once suggested that an engine could be employed to reduce such antics. If you get a creep and he starts being an ass press the "boot" button and play the rest of the game against Houdini. If you beat Houdini, it is the same as if you beat the creep except that for the next 5 or so games his flag icon is replaced by a braying ass.

RonaldJosephCote

        I don't mind if they play badly, that's just part of the learning curve, but I can't stand this constant trooling, useless threads, closed accounts, swearing, rude, childish behavior. The only way to have an intelligent conversation is to post at 2 and 3am, when the total online usage is lower.

NomadicKnight

Best of luck with that idea OP (it'd never work and one reason is because people would abuse the heck out of it)

majimba

simply block individual users who are flagrant or chronic offenders of your own personal taste..!?

ponz111

I agree with the block but it will only solve part of the problem

RG1951

        I played against an opponent a while ago who ended up in a hopeless position and started offering draws repeatedly - as soon as I declined, another offer arrived. This happened about a dozen times. I reckoned at the time that he was trying to distract me into blundering, which I did not and won. This is a kind of gamesmanship and poor sportsmanship. Given the position at the time, his actions were laughable, if they had not been so annoying.