Malicious player
Sort:
There's no need to know what's been discussed previously when the subject is about to change to "me! Me! ME!".
Not reading the thread and then posting willy-nilly wastes the time of others and is disrespectful.
Some posters don't mind doing so though, so long as they get their cookies.
That's what's important. Me me me.
No it's not. I was giving the OP feedback on his thread. Quit the accusations.
"Me me me" is not what is important.
It's rude to give people orders.
checkmateibeatu wrote:
"Me me me" is not what is important.
I had told you many many times that it wasn't about "me me me", but since you continued, I had to give the order.
And goldendog, another one of those accusations, and you will be blocked.
Still not reading, huh?
Ah well, some folks really like to read their own posts.
checkmateibeatu wrote:
And goldendog, another one of those accusations, and you will be blocked.
I'm describing you, accurately.
This guy might be the most selfish poster on the site, if he were real and on the site. Maybe:
Can someone explain how bringing up that blocking or not playing rated long games is a good solution is changing the topic to "me me me"? Notice that the way the topics of these threads is always me posting something that isn't bad and then one of you making a comment about it.
We need to get back to topic here.
Sorry about what happened OP, there are many that accuse me of being selfish in everything I do, but don't believe them, they are wrong. Like I said blocking them is your best bet.
checkmateibeatu wrote:
Can someone explain how bringing up that blocking or not playing rated long games is a good solution is changing the topic to "me me me"? Notice that the way the topics of these threads is always me posting something that isn't bad and then one of you making a comment about it.
 There's no sense trying to explain anything to you. You only read your own posts.
I read your posts. Now let's get back to topic.
[COMMENT DELETED]
sftac wrote:
1pawndown wrote:
If you could post his name we could all block him. Maybe he'd get the message when he couldn't get any play.
 That suggestion's sounding more than a little trollish, to my ears.
sftac
I disagree. I think that this naming and shaming rule is flawed, as people who stall games like this deserve to be outed to the public, not defended. Â Presumably, the naming and shaming rule was to defend people who may not have actually stalled the game, as well as other people that didn't do anything (like a thread that someone made calling me a complete and utter twit).
This is the thread that enlighted me that the naming and shaming rule is flawed:
http://www.chess.com/forum/view/community/how-do-you-report-someone
Please Sign Up to comment.
If you need help, please contact our Help and Support team.