Just not any fun here

that has nothing to do with what i said.

I don't think you understand what inflation and deflation means, which is ok. What you described can be referred to elo deflation, where higher elos become easier to attain due to a reduced player base among other factors. However, in reality chess suffers from elo inflation, the phenomenon where it becomes easier to attain a certain elo due to increased player base among other factors. Therefore, 400, 500, and 600 rated players are actually worse than they were in the past.

I know exactly what inflation and deflation are...

Again..

Nothing to do with what i said. Try reading for once.

You had mentioned, and I quote, "

the playerbase is improving. 400 500 and 600 rated players arent as bad as they were a few years ago. everyones improving.

". This is false. I was simply correcting you.

Its not false. Chess understanding and resources are increasing all the time. A player who starts learning chess today will improve much more rapidly and have a stronger understanding than a player 6 years ago.

its really not a complicated aspect to understand.

There has been statistical data compiled along this topic. I urge you to look into it. A 2000 player in, say, 2018 will be stronger than a 2000 player today. The same can most likely be said for lower elos as well.

a beginner is still a beginner no matter what tools he has to learn from.

some will learn faster than others but that means nothing if they are acquiring a higher elo. My biggest complaint is i have to play a lot of players, like myself that have not been on but a few months. They are better players no doubt, just starting out in here or ... this is the thing to understand, a lot of these players are using the game to teach lower players how to use tactics at the lower level even though they are way higher than that. The content creators even talk about chess.com giving them a lower account or even dropping the elo of an account they have to do this.

Chess.com should not allow players like that to have lower accounts just so they can teach and beat up on lower elo players. Like i stated above we have a great chess player here in town and once a week he gets the big screen out for the chess club to watch how to beat up on the lower elo players. His rating in here is over 2000, he does this for 4 hours every week!!! How many others are doing this? That is the problem that i am addressing. I do resign real fast because i just really dont care anymore, when i have had enough of it i will not play at all, but i do like to play but again if it is not any fun.....

Players may be better than they use to be but if that is the case then their elo should be going up and not have all the tactics at the lower levels....

There is no reason why this would be the case, and you have shown no proof. Why would we believe such an absurd claim?

Even if they are better, a beginner is still a beginner. The elo will go up if they are learning like that and should not be on the lower levels....so the error in that thinking is wrong...

the key in the above statement is they are learning faster and should be moving up faster that is all, there is still masses that may never get better

im a begineer, looking for someone to play with

TY Demonia, i just never know when i will play, but you posting that shows another lower player looking for another person to play that is on his or her level....

and joined 40 minutes ago

she played 6 games and lost in an average of 8 moves.... lol, sounds like there was not much fun for that beginner

no, you're just assuming, and you just have a skill issue

ur one too, and cant be talking

i was not picking on her, just pointing out she at least have a chance

too funny, well at any rate playing lichess at least i dont seem to play advanced players near as often, to funny the way better players try to justify something that doesnt matter to them due to they are not in that situation