Why Do Most People Don't Want to Have Post-game Discuss

Agreed, this site is completely OCD about it's rules. Same for these forums which are moderated like the CIA.  Let's not forget how this site violates our privacy by displaying ALL of our games in a public domain for everyone to see.

It would be enforced by one player reporting the other for chatting about a rated game in progress.  If it were between two players who were conspiring to do well in a tournament, it would be nearly impossible to tell.  I don't know if it's possible for others to go through someone's archive and see chat between the players.

I can tell you that it's common for people to post an ongoing game in the forums and ask for advice.  Usually it appears that the poster doesn't know the rules and removes the game as soon as they realize they are violating the ToS.

How is your privacy violated?  The games are played on chess.com's servers and you choose to play knowing that others can see them.  I'm sure you fixed all of these terrible issues on your chess site.  What's it called again?

There should be an option to hide your games from other users, besides the servers. What this site do about hacking/ virus protection? And I know that talking about other sites on the forums is ALSO against TOS for some crazy reason, so nice try. I don't use any others.

Just naming a chess site isn't against the ToS; advertising them is, and it's not crazy, it's done to prevent trolls and shills from spamming the forums with adverts for other sites.  I was actually mocking you and saying that will all of the flaws you see in chess.com that you should start your own chess site and I would like to see it when it has 20,000,000 accounts. 

Why would chess.com take the time to hide your games from other users?  No idea what you're talking about hacking/virus protection.  

If you see this many problems with the site you might be best going elsewhere, although no chess site I know hides games from other users or has special anti-virus/anti-hacking measures

This is fascinating if true.  Where in the site's rules does it explicitly state that this is so?  I have looked and am unable to find any such prohibition.

i have talked with the opponent many times about specific moves, and why they are made. It makes the conversation so much more enjoyable when people can freely talk about why they make certain moves. It's part of what makes the game what it is. If we couldn't talk with our opponent about the game specifics then there would be no point in playing against another person.

1. Like this site's INTENTIONAL ads and disconnects people from games for free members

2. So that users can't mock people based on their previous games. It should be up to the user whether others can view their games or not.

3. This is a good site in general, and the only site I use, but i think it needs to relax on the rules a little bit. Threads get locked left and right for stupid reasons bys other mods, and I don't have clue how discussing a current game with unfairly "shift" the ratings. I could see how playing yourself with multi accounts is cheating, but not this. Sometimes an opponent will be nasty after winning a game and i explain the blunder/miscalculation i made. I might say "misclick" of my mouse slipped and i made an obvious stupid move, but not doing any of that advanced schemes to cheat in tournaments, which I dont play in anyway, just saying.

Until I see a link to a rule here forbidding discussion of game specifics during the game, I will be of the understanding that there isn't one.

At the very least, chess.com has populated the quick chat responses with "good move", "oops", "interesting", etc.  So some minimum level of commentary on the ongoing game is clearly expected.  And one would think that if there is a rule forbidding in-game commentary about the game at hand, then such a prohibition would be easy to find in the help.

If it is prohibited in daily games, it is news to me.

While I generally don't initiate discussion about the game at hand, so as not to tip my opponent one way or another regarding my thinking, I have responded to queries from opponents.  During one game, my opponent was shocked at an exchange sacrifice I made and asked if I saw their defending minor piece.  I merely responded that I had.  Did I violate some rule by replying to their question?  It would be great if a mod would chime in to let us know one way or another. 

I like to have general conversations with my opponents during play, and would be happy to discuss the game afterwards if it were a particularly interesting one.  If anything, there is too little human interaction on this site. 

That's exactly the way I see it too.

Minimum commentary like "good move" or "mouseslip" is fine.  General discussions that don't focus on the game itself is fine.  Anything you want after the game is fine.  Discussing game specifics in-game is against the rules, although if both players do it and neither cares and it's not a thematic tournament you'll probably never get caught.

I agree that it would be helpful if a mod chimed in.  Chess.com's policies say that you cannot receive ANY assistance in Live Games, which could include your opponent aiding you.  I don't see anything for daily, but I've seen threads get closed for people posting and discussing an ongoing game in the forums and I believe that getting outside help from another person is against the rules in daily.

As to some of the above comments, I seriously doubt the site intentionally disconnects anyone.  I was a free member for a long time and I never experienced this, although ads could slow down your connection, but that's their business model.  If you want a site where everyone pays they are out there.

Again, got a link to the rule??? Let's make sure we're all on the same page.  Yes, outside help during Live Games is prohibited here:  What are the site's policies?  On that page, it indicates that all rules are listed here:  https://www.chess.com/legal#rules.  I've looked.  There is nothing prohibiting discussion of a game with one's opponent while it is ongoing.  

One could argue that discussion of an ongoing Live game with one's opponent is not "outside help" as it is not "outside" the game.  I think this is why you say it "could include your opponent aiding you."  It's subject to interpretation.

Clearly posting to the forums regarding an ongoing daily game is problematic because it is outside help.  But that wasn't the topic.  The topic is discussing a game with one's opponent while the game is in progress.  If you don't find a rule stating this is prohibited, then why do you think it is prohibited?

I think it's prohibited because of what people knowledgeable about site rules, including mods, have said.  I cannot find an explicit rule that answers this question directly, however  "Outside help" means help from another person, and that can include your opponent.  The rationale is also consistent with chess.com trying to protect the integrity of their rating system and to avoid people from essentially playing as a team in a thematic tournament, where many games start from the same position.

So you don't have a link to a rule.

Do you have a link to a forum post where a mod has said anything on the subject at hand?

^^^Well that's helpful.  I think it is important that we all understand what the rules are and follow them.

I agree that there's no animosity and it would be better if this rule was more explicit. 

I don't have a link to a forum thread that has been locked for this reason, and frankly I don't have the desire to search for one, but I'm sure that I've seen it.  I've also seen mods in the cheating forum telling people not to discuss games in progress.  I believe that "outside help" refers to anything other than the brain of the individual playing the game, so if I'm playing a Live Game I can't rely on anything other than my own brain, including the brain of the opponent.  For daily, databases and opening books are allowed but I believe that any assistance provided by another human is against the rules.

Yet another reason is that, for players far below expert level, the accuracy of postmortem comments are not very reliable.  It's only natural to want to talk about what just happened in a completed game.  But a reliable assessment will require a good chunk of time, and computer analysis.  When my OTB opponents starts offering definite conclusions and advice at the end of a round, I listen courteously for a few minutes, and reply with a few vague generalities, but remain inwardly skeptical until there's time for an in-depth analysis much later, when the opponent is no longer available.  I'm even less inclined to attempt a postmortem online, because in addition to the general unreliability of postmortems at my level, online communication is usually so impersonal and lacking in humor.

Ok, I think I understand where you're coming from. But I would say that Discussion need not include Assistance. 

I take the position that discussion with one's opponent regarding the game at hand is not prohibited.  Chess.com should spell out otherwise if they wish to suppress this practice. 

To do so would further the alienation that some of us feel in playing online chess.

I think that for thematic tournaments with an unusual starting position and groups larger than two, it needs to be prohibited to avoid collusion or the chatting players gaining an unfair advantage over the field. 

I'll ask a mod I know in the cheating forum