Leechers of chess.com

What's wrong with +-50?

No, he hates you, too.

+- 50 is fine. Pretty much any min=max is fine.

But if you want to have max >> min, then you should have at least -100 for min.

Is there a mathematical basis for the ranges you're proposing that would ensure optimal improvement for the greatest number of players? Also, is playing the way to improve, or is it by studying? If you expect to improve by playing, wouldn't longer time controls (Game / 90 for example) be more beneficial? Some people may be called away from the board more frequently than others or have other distractions that cause them to be lgitimately underrated. If you challenge someone 500 rating points higher than you, they probably won't play you anyway. Ratings aren't being skewed. They couldn't be anway. I've been hearing the term "butt hurt" quite a bit lately. I don't know exactly what it means, but I kind of like it.

agreed

You like butt hurt too?

Psh, Mosai, why won't you answer my question?! Your argument has 0 points.

This thread is stupid.

Thanks! If only he'd show. I'll take 'em! Put em up, put em up!

I thought Ronald answered that well.

But to add, while it may not affect me so much right now, I see a growing trend towards this behaviour. And when enough people default on their bank loans, everyone loses their money.

This is your answer Moasi?! Why do you keep likening your fake problem to real ones and saying it's the same thing! Are you worried about aftificially high ratings? Artificially low ones? People not playing enough games? I literally cannot find a problem to discredit. All you keep saying is essentially 'bad behaviour affects everyone'. Which is true in most cases. But you wont define why this is bad behavior. In order to show that it reall is bad behavior, you'll need to show its negitive effects. That's how you determine whether the behavior is good or bad.

So please. Prove this "Leeching" is truely bad behavior by showing a NEGATIVE effect.

Please please please dont say somehthing like "When a father drinks too much, everyone in the house suffers." I beg you.

Second hand smoking hurts everyone

Facepalm.

Please tell me you haven't been trolling the whole time?

               Every field pushes the envelope, until we become desensitized to its results. ( violence, movies, morality, forums). We use to play chess B,C.--before computers. If you play with the ratings long enought, you can, (not me) find a way to cheat. Then you find a way to rationalize the cheating. Then you find a way to rationalize your behavior about rationalizing your cheating. The forums use to be clean. Now, when something offensive comes up, the responce is, Oh your too sensitive; grow a pair; suck it up; if you don't like it, leave. In driving, years ago, speeding was dangerous. Today road rage is the norm. You steal a couple of towels at a hotel. A CEO destroys a few hundred thousand jobs. Suck it up.  The pattern mosai is refering too, is the constant pushing of this envelope.

Phew, that was hard to decifer! I think you're trying to tell me that this "leeching" is pushing an envelope, and could lead to worse consequences.

What on earth could this behavior induce that could be considered anywhere close to the examples you gave?

Hmm. This is giving me an idea, Leechers_R_Us group. What do y'all think?

That would be lying.

                                  nuclear bomb detected

Well now. I guess thread over?