Urk's Account Closed?

Jumping to conclusions leads to assumption, and we all know what assuming leads to.

Making an ass out of you and me.

Godspawn got it!  By the way godspawn is it God spawn or gods pawn?

Repeating my earlier comment: Urk was making a highly offensive allegation against another member with no definitive proof and Urk continued to publish it - with very strong profanity - despite being warned not to do so. Closure of his account was done by Support.

Some people are doing a better job of distinguishing between an allegation and a fact. I have removed comments that treat it as the latter: think about how you would feel if these accusations were being made about you. Thank you to @Brendan_UK for realising this and voluntarily retracting your own posts: if other people cannot do the same in this thread, it will be locked.

Urk's content still exists, but is invisible. We are considering whether to make that content visible again after removing the most recent allegations that has led to this situation.

The thing is, I made no assumptions or allegations (in fact, I assumed the opposite at first - you can check my posts) . I just posted the relevant info that urk referred to.

I still don't *know* (and who cares really) but chess.com's making a big deal changed my mind.

And I believe that Urk's content should be restored, along with his account. Preferably within 2 days, since we are playing 2 very imbalanced games (opposite colored bishops, and sacc'ed pawn for activity). 

What did he say to who

That is a matter of confidentially and it would be best that members no longer speculate and make up theories which as David has said will get this topic locked.  

If you repost offensive content, you are also publicising and promoting that content. Chess.com is acting on this not because of the truth of the allegations (which cannot be determined) but because of the offensive nature of it - again, I would ask how any of you would feel if that sort of allegation was levelled against you.

Urk has the same option as everyone else to write in to Support via https://support.chess.com/customer/portal/emails/new (which does not require an active account), acknowledge his actions and agree to obey the Terms of Service in the future. If he does not, there is no way his account is being reactivated. Unfortunately, the tone of his most recent correspondence forum posts does not make this seem likely. Moderators do not have access to any messages that may have gone back & forth between him and Support, and there may be other content in there that also led Support staff to the decision that they made.

As I said, we are considering whether to make his content visible again after deleting the ones that he was muted for in the first place.

So you were the one accused kaynight? Whatever it is that you were accused of? I really have no idea what's happening with the whole situation.

   Here's what's happening. A lot of people we're making accusations, and then David stepped in and said;                                                                                                                                                             

Can't wait to see the threads demanding his comeback or his unbanning.

Bump?

   ---   I hope that he does come back ( as " New_Wave_Urk "  ? ).

LOL. What were you expecting after using big meanie words for this long?

LIFE WILL CONTINUE MAN, IT WILL. NO ONE IS ESSENTIAL.

Dimitri Urkinovich will be his new name, he loved Russians.

He still could seek asylum in Iran...

pfff

   ---   Interesting and funny   lol.

To be the abuser or to be the abused, that is the question?