The point is I have no desire to cut of revenue stream from chess.com - only to ask that they themselves control the type of advertising they allow on their site
unfair advantage given to gold and platinum members
Sort:
I play only 3rd worlders for their web connection deficiencies. Ah another disconnect . . . (p.s. pay up, freeloader).
You're looking at this all the wrong way OP. This isn't so much an annoyance, but an opportunity; an opportunity for you to get your own free diamond membership!
Lols
Jan 17, 2015
0
#7
@LightYearz I think 'lol' stands for 'laugh out loud' so you can't really make it plural because that would be 'laugh out louds' which doesn't make sense. Just sayin'.
Adblock Plus has an “acceptable ads” filter that allows certain content by default, and the company makes no secret that it charges big companies for whitelisting services – it mentions it right in its FAQ.
AdblockPlus says this fee is about helping it to maintain its filter list, which also whitelists some small websites and blogs for free, in addition to charging those larger companies like Google that participate. But it’s easy to see Google and others buying the right to put ads in front of web-browsing users, with Adblock Plus essentially acting as a gatekeeper meting out access to that sizeable chunk of consumers. Which gives Adblock a lot of power, and companies like Google that can pay a sizeable advantage over mid-sized competitors who can’t.
you turn off your sound, and i will turn off my sound when i play you - then i can know you as the boring young wheeze emanating from the nether regions who does not want me to play music while playing chess
lulz
Jan 17, 2015
0
#12
I never even look whether my opponent is a paying member or not so it's their problem not mine. Membership is so cheap I didn't have to think twice about it and not getting adverts is one of the perks. Obviously adverts that popup on screen stopping you from moving aren't acceptable, but then there's always the option to pay. You get what you pay for (sometimes at least!) and if you pay nothing you have to expect annoying adverts.
Jan 17, 2015
0
#13
@buggie111 - I'm sorry, I must be a bit 'simple' but I read the thing you linked to and I don't understand. I have a few questions:
1. What does the 'u' stand for in 'lulz'?
2. What does the 'z' stand for in 'lulz'?
3. How does the fact that people have changed 'lols' to 'lulz' explain how it makes sense to make the word 'loud' plural?
If anything, I'm more confused than before. 
after it's changed at all from "lol" it doesn't become an acrostic or mnemonic or idk even what the term would be. It just becomes a pseudo-word.
chyss, it's a corruption of lols, like yogurt is a corruption of yoghurt and ketchup of catsup.
Jan 17, 2015
0
#16
@Zigwurst - that answers my first two questions. Thank you!
Do you know the answer to the third? Why did anyone think it makes sense to make 'loud' plural in the first place?
yes_dear wrote:
I play only 3rd worlders for their web connection deficiencies. Ah another disconnect . . . (p.s. pay up, freeloader).
it takes an italian to tell the truth
Jan 17, 2015
0
#18
kaynight wrote:
Turn off the sound.
Good grief, kaynight.
Why you gotta spoil everything with your no-nonsense lucidity?
Jan 17, 2015
0
#19
13 year olds think 'lolz' is cool, adults think people who use it are morons.
kaynight - what is with you, you want me to get a radiogram, turn the sound down, use adblock - what is wrong with the notion of chess.com, using your premium fee, democratically, and sensibly. I notice that you had nothing to say when chess.com said, they could seriously think about a different agency for placing adverts on their site
Do gold or platinum members of chess.com, really think that (heaven forbid) should they play none paying members, who in the i8th second of a 60 second game, are distracted by loud and noisy aural adverts, consider that they have played a fair game (win or lose) I ask because in reviews of my previous novel on the subject, it was suggested that the advantage to gold etc members, was behind the apathy and incipient aggression towards my campaign to get chess.com, to change this wasteful advertising policy, of selling (or not selling) to a young global and socially mobile, audience, medicines designed for an elderly and none chess playing population. Why do the fee paying members think this is a good use of what used to be their monies, if not to buy an unfair advantage.