I don't go that far to promote chess.com but I definately PROMOTE it.
How I support Chess.com
Sort:
Oct 17, 2008
0
#3
How about the thought that they do in effect support c.com by not paying but using it? The ads I'm sure bring in some revenue...still, if you can afford it, you should pay for it, (I do)
immortalgamer wrote:
I've personally decided to stop playing people in correspondence chess who are not members. So everytime I get challenged by someone who has no star next to their name. Thanks, but no thanks...if you are playing hundreds of games on here for free, I don't want to support your habit if you aren't going to support this awesome site. In almost every game I play in live chess I ask non-members why they don't support the site financially if they enjoy it so much.
I think this will help chess.com grow.
Are all premium members like this guy? I don't want to be mistaken for him.
Whether or not people want to become paying members is their business. It's features like that computer analysis thing, not guys like you, that should make people want to buy a membership.
EDIT: That sounded kinda angry. Nothing personal; just giving my two cents (bad pun).
Non-paying users are potential paying users. You should embrace them!
Oct 17, 2008
0
#6
GatoNegro wrote:
Non-paying users are potential paying users. You should embrace them!
Of course there is always potential. That is why I'm saying if they join I will potentially play them :)
I don't know I have an ideological difference with people who don't support this site by paying for a membership. So I'm not going to play with them. In my opinion it cheapens my Membership status.
P.S. Don't take me to seriously here. I'm not trying to create a movement and I will not ask anyone to drink koolaid :)
Sounds bit harsh to me, for a number of reasons:
1) people who decide not to upgrade to a paid membership are in their full right: they are simply using a feature provided by the system. If the system designer didn't want that to happen, they could have just limited the number of daily or concurrent games people with no paid subscription could use;
2) this feature allows paying members more playing opportunities, so we are not losing anything, but actually gaining something (by having more opponents to choose from);
3) more people = more advertisement = more revenue for the site, so it is not true that they do not provide economical benefit to the site
I'd rather discriminate unfair players, cheaters or spammer, rather than people who are in their full rights!
Just my opinion, of course!
member or not member, I love chess :)
You are right but still just because they are not premium doesn't mean they don't support chess.com, actually they support chess.com by showing ads(and clicking them). So I think that you should play with them.
Oh and some people cant pay!
Oct 17, 2008
0
#11
Hmmm....maybe I'll stop playing with anyone who won't pony up for diamond membership...after all they're not paying their full share....
sounds like snobbishness to me....
seriously, there are many reasons why someone doesn't pay for membership, and we shouldn't snub them for it at all.
uh, it think you are going about the deal wrong. people who are just basic members still support chess.com because it makes companies want to advertise on here more. members who pay money just went an extra step. by just participating in games and discussion you are supporting chess.com
TehPantz is right.
Oct 17, 2008
0
#14
My feeling is if you can pay for a membership, you should. It is extremely reasonably priced, and has great features. However, you shouldn't scorn people who don't, after all they might be new to the sight or just unable to for whatever reason buy a membership. They still contribute to the site by being a part of the chess.com community.
They also help by making the site bigger (making more people come) and getting people to chess.com
Dang... just a few moments ago, I had the urge to play a correspondence game against immortalgamer.
Looks like my dreams have been crushed yet again. 
what do you mean
BlackWaive wrote:
Dang... just a few moments ago, I had the urge to play a correspondence game against immortalgamer.
Looks like my dreams have been crushed yet again.
Yeah, I had wanted to play him too. 
Well immortalgamer you should play against them.
Oct 17, 2008
0
#20
immortalgamer wrote:
I've personally decided to stop playing people in correspondence chess who are not members. So everytime I get challenged by someone who has no star next to their name. Thanks, but no thanks...if you are playing hundreds of games on here for free, I don't want to support your habit if you aren't going to support this awesome site. In almost every game I play in live chess I ask non-members why they don't support the site financially if they enjoy it so much.
I think this will help chess.com grow.
I like your enthusiasm to get this site promoted, but personally I think being as friendly as possible to non-members is the best policy. Right now advertisements on this site probably make as much money as is made from a paying member - note that's why a member or above has no ads. Look at social networking sites like <insert preferred social networking site>, they make more money than I'll probably make in a lifetime from ads!
I've personally decided to stop playing people in correspondence chess who are not members. So everytime I get challenged by someone who has no star next to their name. Thanks, but no thanks...if you are playing hundreds of games on here for free, I don't want to support your habit if you aren't going to support this awesome site. In almost every game I play in live chess I ask non-members why they don't support the site financially if they enjoy it so much.
I think this will help chess.com grow.