Can a banned player return by making new accounts?

Martin_Stahl

Without making the site pay only, as a way to link a real life name to an account, it is impossible to completely stop a motivated person with enough knowledge off the site. Then that would create a financial disincentive along with banning the use of the same payment method for future accounts in the case of extreme TOS violations (and that isn't necessarily a guarantee).

The_economist9
Martin_Stahl wrote:

Without making the site pay only, as a way to link an real life name to an account, it is impossible to completely stop a motivated person with enough knowledge off the site. Then that would create a financial disincentive along with banning the use of the same payment method for future accounts in the case of extreme TOS violations (and that isn't necessarily a guarantee).

Isn't chess.com a pay only site? Also I did not use my credit card to pay for my membership. I used my google play account so chess.com still won't know the identity of the person. Same with those who pay via other ways such as iTunes account. 

ILoveTildaAlSafawi
The_economist9 a écrit :
Martin_Stahl wrote:

Without making the site pay only, as a way to link an real life name to an account, it is impossible to completely stop a motivated person with enough knowledge off the site. Then that would create a financial disincentive along with banning the use of the same payment method for future accounts in the case of extreme TOS violations (and that isn't necessarily a guarantee).

Isn't chess.com a pay only site? Also I did not use my credit card to pay for my membership. I used my google play account so chess.com still won't know the identity of the person. Same with those who pay via other ways such as iTunes account. 

Not a pay only site

Martin_Stahl
The_economist9 wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:

Without making the site pay only, as a way to link an real life name to an account, it is impossible to completely stop a motivated person with enough knowledge off the site. Then that would create a financial disincentive along with banning the use of the same payment method for future accounts in the case of extreme TOS violations (and that isn't necessarily a guarantee).

Isn't chess.com a pay only site? Also I did not use my credit card to pay for my membership. I used my google play account so chess.com still won't know the identity of the person. Same with those who pay via other ways such as iTunes account. 

 

The site could theoretically tie the account to the Google account or iTunes account when paying and the ban those accounts for someone if they closed the account. That's what I'm saying, paying for a premium membership allows attaching a member to a payment method and would make it easier to block, but it would still be possible to bypass that.

 

Real name ID would be the most fool-proof way but that costs money and if that was something the site required, would drop the number of players/members by a lot. That isn't a business model the site really wants.

david
MAAKASU wrote:

How about if suhm1 buys a new computer and creates a new password such as •••••••••• and uses that to cre8 a new account and spam or cheat?

If someone has to buy a new computer every time they want to create a new account here, that's a huge expenditure of $ and effort - the overwhleming majority of people aren't going to do that.

Chess.com is not a "pay only" site - anyone can be a basic member and play chess and participate in the forums, but they don't get access to the premium features and will get ads from a 3rd party provider.

You can choose to become a premium member, where you pay a subscription fee and get access to those additional features and aren't shown any more ads. There's 3 tiers of premium membership with increasing benefits: see https://www.chess.com/membership

It's really up to each person to decide what sort of features they are willing to pay for and what extent they want to support the site: long before I was a moderator, I was happy to be a gold member and pay that amount to get rid of the ads.

The_economist9
Martin_Stahl wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:

Without making the site pay only, as a way to link an real life name to an account, it is impossible to completely stop a motivated person with enough knowledge off the site. Then that would create a financial disincentive along with banning the use of the same payment method for future accounts in the case of extreme TOS violations (and that isn't necessarily a guarantee).

Isn't chess.com a pay only site? Also I did not use my credit card to pay for my membership. I used my google play account so chess.com still won't know the identity of the person. Same with those who pay via other ways such as iTunes account. 

 

The site could theoretically tie the account to the Google account or iTunes account when paying and the ban those accounts for someone if they closed the account. That's what I'm saying, paying for a premium membership allows attaching a member to a payment method and would make it easier to block, but it would still be possible to bypass that.

 

Real name ID would be the most fool-proof way but that costs money and if that was something the site required, would drop the number of players/members by a lot. That isn't a business model the site really wants.

Oh dear, my google play account is linked to my chess.com account. So I can get tracked down easily, but I still think it is easier to track someone with a credit card than a google play card. Chess.com is my good site, I am sure many players will pay to for this site. Yikes I scared that some sites will know my real ID xD.

The_economist9
david wrote:
MAAKASU wrote:

How about if suhm1 buys a new computer and creates a new password such as •••••••••• and uses that to cre8 a new account and spam or cheat?

If someone has to buy a new computer every time they want to create a new account here, that's a huge expenditure of $ and effort - the overwhleming majority of people aren't going to do that.

Chess.com is not a "pay only" site - anyone can be a basic member and play chess and participate in the forums, but they don't get access to the premium features and will get ads from a 3rd party provider.

You can choose to become a premium member, where you pay a subscription fee and get access to those additional features and aren't shown any more ads. There's 3 tiers of premium membership with increasing benefits: see https://www.chess.com/membership

It's really up to each person to decide what sort of features they are willing to pay for and what extent they want to support the site: long before I was a moderator, I was happy to be a gold member and pay that amount to get rid of the ads.

+1 

I personally don't think someone will buy a new computer/MacBook/laptop just to come back here again. 

Chinese_Person
david wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:

Does chess.com/moderators forgive players? If they come back, but don't do that again. 

Moderators don't have the authority to make that sort of decision, but Chess.com does allow people a 2nd chance if they own their behaviour, apologise, and promise not to do it again. An account closed for Fair Play violations is never re-opened, but they may be allowed a new account, and an account closed for Abuse may be re-opened. People only get 1 second chance, though, and if they blow that one, they don't get any more. They also don't get to lie about their re-instatement in the public forums and pretend that Chess.com made a mistake.

why can't accounts closed for fair play be reopened but accounts closed for abuse can

david
Chinese_Person wrote:
david wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:

Does chess.com/moderators forgive players? If they come back, but don't do that again. 

Moderators don't have the authority to make that sort of decision, but Chess.com does allow people a 2nd chance if they own their behaviour, apologise, and promise not to do it again. An account closed for Fair Play violations is never re-opened, but they may be allowed a new account, and an account closed for Abuse may be re-opened. People only get 1 second chance, though, and if they blow that one, they don't get any more. They also don't get to lie about their re-instatement in the public forums and pretend that Chess.com made a mistake.

why can't accounts closed for fair play be reopened but accounts closed for abuse can

We can delete the abuse that caused an account to be closed. We don't delete the games played by an account closed for Fair Play violations, but those games shouldn't count towards that person's second chance history or rating.

Chinese_Person
david wrote:
Chinese_Person wrote:
david wrote:
The_economist9 wrote:

Does chess.com/moderators forgive players? If they come back, but don't do that again. 

Moderators don't have the authority to make that sort of decision, but Chess.com does allow people a 2nd chance if they own their behaviour, apologise, and promise not to do it again. An account closed for Fair Play violations is never re-opened, but they may be allowed a new account, and an account closed for Abuse may be re-opened. People only get 1 second chance, though, and if they blow that one, they don't get any more. They also don't get to lie about their re-instatement in the public forums and pretend that Chess.com made a mistake.

why can't accounts closed for fair play be reopened but accounts closed for abuse can

We can delete the abuse that caused an account to be closed. We don't delete the games played by an account closed for Fair Play violations, but those games shouldn't count towards that person's second chance history or rating.

so are you saying that bad actions can be reversed but not cheating?

david
Chinese_Person wrote:
david wrote:

We can delete the abuse that caused an account to be closed. We don't delete the games played by an account closed for Fair Play violations, but those games shouldn't count towards that person's second chance history or rating.

so are you saying that bad actions can be reversed but not cheating?

Bad content can be deleted and they have no bearing on the ongoing status of the account. Games are never deleted, although we can give other people their rating points back.

Chinese_Person
david wrote:
Chinese_Person wrote:
david wrote:

We can delete the abuse that caused an account to be closed. We don't delete the games played by an account closed for Fair Play violations, but those games shouldn't count towards that person's second chance history or rating.

so are you saying that bad actions can be reversed but not cheating?

Bad content can be deleted and they have no bearing on the ongoing status of the account. Games are never deleted, although we can give other people their rating points back.

so does that mean that it's better to be mean than to be a cheater?

david
Chinese_Person wrote:
david wrote:
Chinese_Person wrote:
david wrote:

We can delete the abuse that caused an account to be closed. We don't delete the games played by an account closed for Fair Play violations, but those games shouldn't count towards that person's second chance history or rating.

so are you saying that bad actions can be reversed but not cheating?

Bad content can be deleted and they have no bearing on the ongoing status of the account. Games are never deleted, although we can give other people their rating points back.

so does that mean that it's better to be mean than to be a cheater?

It's better to be neither

Chinese_Person

ok

TheChessPianist

Thank you @david