Inflation,Poor get poorer ,chesser get lesser
Sort:
Once again: I am very grateful to Erik and his friends, they are doing great job, they shouldn't work for free, and for my opinion chess.com is the best chess site. But, once you crossed the line, and start charging, you could easily be carried away.
I don't see the contradiction: the truth spirit of the web is a spirit of freedom. One big world with no borders, what so ever. Unfortunately, latly this beautiful dream start to crack, and the walls are rising.
I think your paranoia is rising.
I can't argue with you medical diagnosis doc...
night_knight wrote:
Well, again you don't answer to main point. Is it fair to give something for free, and than start charging for it? I can see the economic side, but not the moral side.
night_knight you posted this on January 26th 2008 and have been a member since January 25th 2008. Dude please don't come here and insult us.
Jan 26, 2008
0
#27
So... wait... you'd rather be forced to pay money for everything, rather than get the whole thing for free to begin with, then be asked to pay for the extra services?
How strange... I personally see no moral problem with this, the only problem I have is the length of time its going to take me to save up for lifetime membership with my shitty job.
King_William wrote: night_knight wrote:
Well, again you don't answer to main point. Is it fair to give something for free, and than start charging for it? I can see the economic side, but not the moral side.
night_knight you posted this on January 26th 2008 and have been a member since January 25th 2008. Dude please don't come here and insult us.
That's some high quality investigative journalism.
So, you joined after the premium accounts started, did you?
I am not trying to insult anyone. I was a member in chess.com since the summer, and I played more than hundred games. then I stopped playing for a few months and came back on January 25th in a different user name. Before I stopped playing a lott of things were free, and when I came back I was surprised to see that they cost money now.
ah a confession! please go and read the terms and conditions of this site....
night_knight wrote:
neneko, you are certainly right, the impotant thing is playing. But what if it's a slippery slope? what if tommorow you will have to pay for playing? It is the direction the net goes, and we don't have to let it happen
the slippery slope theory is considered a fallacy in any debate in that it assumes there is no gray area and there must be a definite transition at a certain point from category A to category B. Public Speaking 101
I have just read the conitions of the site. I don't see where did I made anything wrong. Is it not allowed to come back to the site I love after a few months brake?
From, http://www.chess.com/faqs.html
Can I have multiple accounts?
No. This is considered cheating. You may only play chess under one account.
I have only one active account.
And about the slippery slope: I have learnd philosophy for many years, and I know what you are talking about. But the most "definite transition at a certain point from category A to category B" had been crossed - the obvious line between paying and not paying. All the other lines from now on are quite gray for my opintion.
night_knight wrote:
I have only one active account.
And about the slippery slope: I have learnd philosophy for many years, and I know what you are talking about. But the most "definite transition at a certain point from category A to category B" had been crossed - the obvious line between paying and not paying. All the other lines from now on are quite gray for my opintion.
trying to defend flawed argurment. Are you George Bush?
This is called Ad Hominem - attacking the man instead of his ideas. very popolar among politicans. Try answering the argument instead.
night_knight wrote:
I have only one active account.
Make my day and tell us, you are actually the widely loved, Reservesmonkey!!!
that was over line but you know this is the greatest site out there and I just hate seeing people going around trying to poke holes in it
O.K I agree. and I am not trying to make holes in anything
neneko, you are certainly right, the impotant thing is playing. But what if it's a slippery slope? what if tommorow you will have to pay for playing? It is the direction the net goes, and we don't have to let it happen
Earlier, you said it was not the spirit of the net. Either it is, or it isn't. This slippery slope crap sounds like paranoia. I don't think the chess.com team wants to commit business suicide, which is what pay-to-play chess would be. They were open and upfront about the change. You're right you don't have to let it happen. It can happen without your permission just fine. If they were actually doing something the majority of the people found unfair, they would fail. Nobody would join. As it is, though, people are excited to be able to support this awesome team.