cc doesn't care about how the site functions-as long as they make money.
i remember a time when erik started topics asking what the members wanted, liked, or disliked. those days are long gone.
asking the questions you pose will likely lead to lame responses from mods and zero responses from staff.
cc doesn't care about how the site functions-as long as they make money.
i remember a time when erik started topics asking what the members wanted, liked, or disliked. those days are long gone.
asking the questions you pose will likely lead to lame responses from mods and zero responses from staff.
When Erik made a sort of... history of chess.com thing on youtube (whatever it was), I was thinking uh-oh. That's his swan song. "I had fun guys, but it's grown beyond me now, and I made my fortune, and I'm not interested anymore."
Probably reading too much into it, but yeah, that was my first impression.
It's possible their staff just isnt big enough to handle all the players questions and reports.
Yeah, lack of education crossed my mind, but chess.com is a wealthy company, they can afford to hire someone who can write English better than an average 15 year old American.
Chess.com’s Computer Accuracy Precision Score (CAPS for short) is an analysis tool that tells you how close your moves were to what the engine would have played. In its second iteration, CAPS2 now primarily scores games between 50% and 100%. This provides users with an intuitive metric as the scoring is like school with an ‘A’ being 90% to 100%. Importantly, a score of 100% does not indicate cheating since there is more to the calculation than how many moves matched the engine’s choice.
---
My rewrite.
268 words to 84. Less than 1/3rd of the words, clearer, no lost meaning, and much easier to read.
https://support.chess.com/article/1135-what-is-accuracy-in-analysis-how-is-it-measured
None of this bothers me at all. I just want my flairs and my race to 1000 topics.
Oooh just thought of a whole new innovative idea for a blog - what's your favorite color?
what's your favorite color?
what is ur fav color?
pleas tell in coments below and like and subscribe but only if you want to thank you for reading this one
what's your favorite color?
what is ur fav color?
pleas tell in coments below and like and subscribe but only if you want to thank you for reading this one
Dang it's like your weren't even trying 😉
please tell everyone to read i want to know the favorite color so post it i hope everyone sees my topic please message me to tell me if you saw this forum
The whole internet thing with minor errors, wrong words being used, slightly faulty programming, terminal ambiguity etc etc merely reflects what would have been called back in the day "declining standards of education". Nowadays, that has to be taken for granted and should probably be referred to as reclining standards of education; but what about split infinitives?
But I skipped 2 grades for math and I'm an expert in history. AMA. Uwu.
i want to be the first person on chess.com to make 100000 forums please tell ideas to me for which forum to make
pl,ease tell how many forums should i make every day?
I said you I want blogging no?
pl,ease tell how many forums should i make every day?
I said you I want blogging no?
hahahahahahahahah 😂🤣😆 😂🤣😆 😂🤣😆 😂🤣😆 😂🤣😆 😂🤣😆
cc doesn't care about how the site functions-as long as they make money.
i remember a time when erik started topics asking what the members wanted, liked, or disliked. those days are long gone.
asking the questions you pose will likely lead to lame responses from mods and zero responses from staff.
Ok boomer
cc doesn't care about how the site functions-as long as they make money.
i remember a time when erik started topics asking what the members wanted, liked, or disliked. those days are long gone.
asking the questions you pose will likely lead to lame responses from mods and zero responses from staff.
Ok boomer
what?
https://support.chess.com/
The quality of writing in the chess.com FAQ is fairly poor... to the point that sometimes it's misleading or outright false.
Often in the first sentence. For example:
https://support.chess.com/article/1073-how-do-i-get-a-chess-title-grandmaster-im-etc
"You've probably seen some accounts on Chess.com that have red letters next to their name such as GM, IM, WFM, and etc. These are FIDE titles"
If "these" refer to "red letters you've probably seen" then this is false since not all titles are FIDE titles.
-
Later it explains GM requires "an Elo chess rating" of at least 2500 while FM requires at least "a FIDE Rating of 2300."
This implies (remember it's total beginners reading this) that a chess.com rating of 2500 qualifies for a GM title since the FAQ is making a distinction between an "Elo chess rating" and a "FIDE Rating."
Also lots of minor errors... "Rating" shouldn't be capitalized, "Elo chess rating" is redundant since chess is implied by the context, I could go on and on and on (and on and on and on)... but let's skip to another example.
-
-
https://support.chess.com/article/1135-what-is-accuracy-in-analysis-how-is-it-measured
"Your Accuracy is a measurement of how closely you played to what the computer has determined to be the best possible play against your opponent's specific moves."
Due to the (once again) poor wording (ffs it's poor for so many reasons...), it's hard to tell whether this is merely misleading or simply false.
CAPS is NOT a T1 analysis.
-
-
Here's one in the fking title
How about "puzzle rush sessions"?
But ok let's click on it and see what it says...
Oh look, it gives outdated information. Currently puzzle rush is greyed out so I'm not able to see my past 25 "games."
And no, it's not a database issue, because I can still use this link (below) that I saved on account of the fact that I assumed chess.com is such a monumental fkup most of the time that I'd need it and... ok so I'm ranting and it's time to stop, but you get the point.
https://www.chess.com/puzzles/rush/archive
Seriously *********, just link the URL to the button...
-
-
By the way to write this I think I clicked on 4 links... meaning only one of them was passable at a glance... it still needed lots of proofreading but nothing outright false (what a low bar).