IM MAD AS HELL!!!!!

ERIK,

I GET VERY VERY ANGRY WHEN PEOPLE REFUSE TO BELIEVE ME. I AM NOW AT MY ANGRIEST. YOU PURPOSELY DISREGARDED THE FACTS AND DONT DO ANY RESEARCH. I HATE HOLDING YOUR HAND AND SHOWING YOU THE TRUTH. BUT ONCE AGAIN, I MUST.

Go to to www.ranking.com which is the THEEE official source for internet site ranking. It ranks chess.com as the 25,561 most popular site based on traffic. Well done, quite an achievement. BUT DONT LIE AND MISLEAD YOUR OWN MEMBERS. redhotpawn.com is ranked as the NUMBER 1 chess website in the WORLD at 23,498 based on traffic. I hate to bring up the competition, but you FORCED me to. You are not far behind, and perhaps my statement of mediocrity is now shot full of holes. I shall retract my statement of chess.com being mediocre because, clearly, in the public's eye, it is not. My opinion does not matter when countered with the public's.

PLEASE, from now on, DONT LIE. You can cheat, that doesnt bother me, but when you lie, when you DELIBERATELY make false statements, you lose credibility. You have gone down a notch in my book, ERIK.

#2 is what you are. Still very very respectable, but not yet #1. As the owner, you are held to a higher degree of accountability. Just as doctors and lawyers are in the real world. I would arrest you and throw you in jail if I could.

Pathetic. Shameful. Slimy.

People who take it upon themselves to deliberately disrupt communities should be pitied and ignored, if you ask me- ignore this thread.

EDIT: ps. since when does one define ranking as "amount of traffic."

   Adam Sandler in the movie "Billy Madison"

    ERIK!!, Erik is a bad, bad man

If you don't mind cheating you shouldn't mind lying or stealing for that matter...

I did some research and you are listed #1 on panzy.com

 Man that was a weak, weak joke.

If by MAD you mean crazy... sure.

If you actually read Erik's (why do you always caps his name? do you actually speak like you type? cause that would be funny) the reference to the number of members is clearly the qualifier he is using for his claim.

If you showed another chess site with more members than here than your claim might have some substance to it.  But instead you are saying his claim is unjustified due to you using different paramaters than he is clearly using.

You crack me up cheater_1...

The only place that ranking.com is THEEEEE official ANYTHING, is in your mind, and the minds of the staff there. They do NOT (I repeat NOT) track actual webtraffic, they use "market research". What they use is equavalent to Neilson boxes for television. The difference here is that for TV, there is really no better way to measure what people are watching, but there are better ways to track internet activity.

Go ahead, be as mad as you want, you're still wrong.

ranking.com is total crap. THHHEEEEE default standard? if you knew anything about the internet at all you would know that alexa, compete, and quantcast or the leaders. here is the alexa chart of "ranking.com".

click here to see a chart of ranking.com in the toilet compared to the others.

anyway, i commend you on wasting approximately 6 hours of your life scrambling to find even ONE "resource" that, inaccurate as it may be, shows another website as barely larger than chess.com. 

if you are putting your money on ranking.com to be the most accurate assessment of traffic, i have some AMAZING penny stocks that might interest you. 

anyway, even if we throw this bogus "ranking.com" illegitimate-child-of-a-ranking-service into the ring, 3 out of 4 websites agree => chess.com is #1. 

regardless, the point wasn't to prove that chess.com was the most popular chess site, but to merely contradict what you were saying about chess.com being "stuck in a quagmire of mediocracy" or whatever. 

anyway, i will rephrase my statement about the popularity of Chess.com to be => "According to the top 3 web traffic monitoring agencies, Chess.com is the most popular chess-specific website in the world."

better? :)

(and dude, what was that about holding my hand. that weirded me out. sheesh. i hardly even know you...)

I am 100% correct. I was quite skeptical when ERIK mentioned those two sites. 70% time those sites say something like, "we do not have enough data on the site you requested, so here is an approximation." UNACCEPTABLE.

I will not discount the achievement that this site has made, but for ERIK to say it is the #1 site is NO DIFFERENT...NO DIFFERENT.....NO DIFFERENT than me saying I am the internet's number one chess player. And you all remember what happened to me.

Also, POGO and YAHOO bring in millions and millions of visitors to their site, but it is true that the ranking DOES NOT break down individual areas of those site. Using PURE LOGIC, it is an IRREFUTABLE TRUTH that just the chess  portion of the #23 ranked site and the #1 ranked site (respectively) will bring in tens of thousands of more page views than the 25,561 ranked site. 10th grade mathematics, people.

Once again, the LOGIC and the RESEARCH and the FACTS and the INTELLIGENCE and the TRUTH and the DEBATORIAL SKILLS presented by me are insurmountable by you all. You me have beaten me at my own game, but you will not win this fight.

you are the most obvious "bad arguer" in the world. i know 7th graders who make more effective use of hypberbole, redirection, and other debate/argument tactics. on the spectrum of persuasively creative and comically absurd, you're not even close to the line.

still, i hadn't derived a single chuckle from your posts in several weeks but this one gave me a good laugh. for a while there i was worried. you have transitioned back to "entertaining" from "annoying" in my book. you may now kiss the ring.

arguing with cheater_-2 is a total blast - it's like having a conversation with a circus clown!

sometimes its:

other times its:

either way, its fun because he always has tricks in the bag! sure, we are expecting the rubber chicken, the squirting flower, and the oversize shoes, but it's still fun to watch. 

i'm still having a good laugh that he drummed up "ranking.com" as a resource. lol!