Atheism is not a fashion, as unortho and others claim.
Atheism compares to religion as democracy compares to other forms of government.
Until we haven't found a better form of government, democracy is preferable.
As long as there is no proof that god exists (AND interferes), atheism is the more rational and simpler choice.
you must feel real clever with that one. sounds like a quote of some "author" on discovery channel
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9594351/Sir-John-Gurdon-Nobel-Prize-winner-was-too-stupid-for-science-at-school.html
"A British scientist whose schoolmasters told him he was too stupid to study the subject has been awarded the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology for his pioneering work on cloning"
I wonder if that scientist danced on the graves of his schoolmasters after he won the prize.
I constantly see people who have say a blitz rating of 850....after 3000 games!!! And they continue playing.....
I mean what is wrong with them? why don't they just quit?
Many people are greatly underrated because their sense of self-worth is not wrapped up with their chess.com rating, and they might just resign if the phone rings, the baby cries, or the dinner guests arrive. At my house, I sometimes allow my grandchildren to sign on and play a game or three, because it keeps them quiet while I talk to their mother. I don't have a lot of toys at my house, and who cares what your chess.com rating is? I just don't get it when people ask me to play them unrated, either. If your rating means something to you, then by playing unrated you are deluding yourself. Let's face it folks, this is the internet, connections count, people can cheat, and ratings here are illusionary anyway. If you want a rating, enter a rated US Chess or FIDE tournament.
Oh, and BTW, the premise of this question is inarguably arrogant.
arrogance is not a logical fallacy, nor does it invalidate his question. since i argue that the question isnt arrogant, i dont know if it inarguably so.
I have only 1100 with bullet and i win with 2200 ranking man...he,he..i play chess online for 11 years....Why i win?...because i smart and play for fun and not use my mind...
I constantly see people who have say a blitz rating of 850....after 3000 games!!! And they continue playing.....
I mean what is wrong with them? why don't they just quit?
Many people are greatly underrated because their sense of self-worth is not wrapped up with their chess.com rating, and they might just resign if the phone rings, the baby cries, or the dinner guests arrive. At my house, I sometimes allow my grandchildren to sign on and play a game or three, because it keeps them quiet while I talk to their mother. I don't have a lot of toys at my house, and who cares what your chess.com rating is? I just don't get it when people ask me to play them unrated, either. If your rating means something to you, then by playing unrated you are deluding yourself. Let's face it folks, this is the internet, connections count, people can cheat, and ratings here are illusionary anyway. If you want a rating, enter a rated US Chess or FIDE tournament.
Better to not let your grandchildren to play on your account for a few reasons.
1. It gives your opponents a false sense of your rating.
2. Your opponents do not know they are not playing you.
3. Chess.com says it is against their rules to let others play on your account.
My son played some games on my account and while he won all his games--it came out with a 1600 rating 
And now some players think i am this somewhat low rated player when in reality i have real ratings of 2188 and 2530.
I did not know my son played on my account until i noticed the low rating.
LeonSKennedy992 wrote:
I constantly see people who have say a blitz rating of 850....after 3000 games!!! And they continue playing.....
I mean what is wrong with them? why don't they just quit?
I asked them...They said they do it just to piss you off...
why ? Let every one Play what he will
why should they quit? A game between two 900 players is just as difficult and hard to win as two 2700 players playing each other. So as long as they play people of their own level it's relative. You're no grandmaster and are just an average player so why don't you quit? You'll never be good enough to win any worthwhile tournament, nor to teach, so why do you carry on when your position is just as hopeless?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/9594351/Sir-John-Gurdon-Nobel-Prize-winner-was-too-stupid-for-science-at-school.html
"A British scientist whose schoolmasters told him he was too stupid to study the subject has been awarded the Nobel Prize in medicine or physiology for his pioneering work on cloning"
I wonder if that scientist danced on the graves of his schoolmasters after he won the prize.
he probably used an engine to help with his cloning work. Guy's a cheat if I've seen one! You can't be a mental retard at school and then suddenly win a nobel peace prize! IMPOSSIBLE! Engine user for sure.
Atheism is not a fashion, as unortho and others claim.
Atheism compares to religion as democracy compares to other forms of government.
Until we haven't found a better form of government, democracy is preferable.
As long as there is no proof that god exists (AND interferes), atheism is the more rational and simpler choice.
There's already conclusive proof that god DOESN'T exist. Religious people. A god would never have made anyone so stupid.
Atheism is not a fashion, as unortho and others claim.
Atheism compares to religion as democracy compares to other forms of government.
Until we haven't found a better form of government, democracy is preferable.
As long as there is no proof that god exists (AND interferes), atheism is the more rational and simpler choice.
There's already conclusive proof that god DOESN'T exist. Religious people. A god would never have made anyone so stupid.
Guys, stop talking about religion, please. Do you want to get this thread locked or what?
Why don't sub 1000's quit after playing hundreds of games? The answer to that young man is that just playing this great game is it's own reward.
The critical point should not be what the absolute rating is after playing so many games. Rather, the critical point should be if the rating is going up or down or stagnating. If the rating is going down or stagnating after playing 1000s of games, then somthing needs correction.
Yep, sub-1000s are worthless creatures for people rated above 1500.
Sub-2000s are worthless creatures are for people rated above 2500.
And sub-2500s are worthless creatures for people rated above 2700.
And sub-3000s are worthless creatures for engines rated 3200.
Engines are easy prey for neural networks (AI).
And of course, 1000 rated players would feel like they are gods of chess when faced with an opponent just learning chess(say 600 rated). It is relative!
Either all of us can quit chess because we can't defeat the Artificial Intelligence or continue playing because its fun to play (and improve as we go along).
You also suck being a decent person, after [your age here] years, and you should probably kill yourself, cause you ain't improving. what? oh, it's fun to live? it's fun to play? oh, i see. you're a hypocrite then, mister. 😀
you show them gurl! 
Many people are greatly underrated because their sense of self-worth is not wrapped up with their chess.com rating, and they might just resign if the phone rings, the baby cries, or the dinner guests arrive. At my house, I sometimes allow my grandchildren to sign on and play a game or three, because it keeps them quiet while I talk to their mother. I don't have a lot of toys at my house, and who cares what your chess.com rating is? I just don't get it when people ask me to play them unrated, either. If your rating means something to you, then by playing unrated you are deluding yourself. Let's face it folks, this is the internet, connections count, people can cheat, and ratings here are illusionary anyway. If you want a rating, enter a rated US Chess or FIDE tournament.
Better to not let your grandchildren to play on your account for a few reasons.
1. It gives your opponents a false sense of your rating.
2. Your opponents do not know they are not playing you.
3. Chess.com says it is against their rules to let others play on your account.
My son played some games on my account and while he won all his games--it came out with a 1600 rating And now some players think i am this somewhat low rated player when in reality i have real ratings of 2188 and 2530.
I did not know my son played on my account until i noticed the low rating.
I constantly see people who have say a blitz rating of 850....after 3000 games!!! And they continue playing.....
I mean what is wrong with them? why don't they just quit?
I asked them...They said they do it just to piss you off...
--- Rofl --- Plus 10 post !!!