anok, that's what one is subject to in od.
one reason od does not work for many is because so many refuse to let facts get in the way of their beliefs. many in the group are steadfast and post responses as if the other is an idiot.
in my time there i have read and been a part of many good discussions. but, so many devolve to the point where reasonable members view posting as futile.
If the Open Discussion Admins aren't acting on particular posts, the next escalation point would be to log a ticket with the Support team. Even if they deem that no action is warranted, they should still reply to that effect, unless they've done so repeatedly in the past and you're still logging tickets about similar stuff anyway.
If they're not replying to a ticket, I would log that as a separate ticket: not about the original thing you logged the first ticket for, but about the lack of response to that ticket, as that's a systemic issue with the ticket recording & resolution system that I'm sure both @erik (as site owner) and @shaun (as head of the Support team) would care about, as I know they review the metrics regularly and frequently, and therefore the accuracy of those figures is critical.
Those two are also the people you could try and escalate things to if you're not happy with the other responses you are (or aren't) getting: although @erik only accepts messages from friends, he allows anyone to post a user note on his profile; I'm not sure about @shaun's privacy settings, so apologies in advance if that's not possible.
There's also no reason why one couldn't apply Nikprit's principle of the original poster policing their own thread in Open Discussion - start one on LGBT rights, or abortion, or islamophobia, and block the people who try to troll the thread. As Al says, it IS possible to have reasonable discussions there.
I have also been asking people to check out the Debate+ club - it's not an "official" club like Open Discussion, but some of the moderators are also admins there, and I know it's more heavily moderated than OD but less moderated than the public forums. It's also got quite a few more members than Open Discussion, and although it does seem to be oriented more around chat, it might be worth trying to start reasonable forum conversations there.
no. i wouldn't say it needs fixing. let it be and let the member beware. my issue is with the public forums. that's the difference.
anyone can create a group. that group may get members that have similar opinions, and there may be little debate. od, as i see it, was created for those that would like religious and political discussion with little or no moderation. the rub lies with those that will not read, listen, allow thoughts in their head!
i have a pretty simple philosophy where thought matters. i think od was originated in that vein but has devolved to plain old argument and childish behavior.
Open Discussion is what it is and though it's cool that it's allowed few would expect a reasoned debate on anything. Public forums are entitled to expect better behavior but subject bans are ridiculous. To ban, for example religion per se, rather than preaching, forbids all discussion on the Gods of antiquity and with them most of ancient culture.
Open Discussion is what it is and though it's cool that it's allowed few would expect a reasoned debate on anything. Public forums are entitled to expect better behavior but subject bans are ridiculous. To ban, for example religion per se, rather than preaching, forbids all discussion on the Gods of antiquity and with them most of ancient culture.
When i joined the Open Discussion group, I on a daily basis post a Bible quote of the day. Now keep in mind that this is the OD group, where it is allowed. I was getting private messages telling me not to post them in the group. So its not that its just allowed, its that some still feel that no matter what the rules, they feel they have the final say. Its to be expected, and its part of the group. Human nature doing its thing.
At least you get to not only preach but also face cyber martyrdom. Human nature also draws many to visit the Cirucus Maximus and in OD there are all sorts of natures.
At least you get to not only preach but also face cyber martyrdom. Human nature also draws many to visit the Cirucus Maximus and in OD there are all sorts of natures.
i left od theres no way to get a sensible conversation there , i see what you say damocles and al czervik , but i dont like to spend my online time getting abused , and thats all i was encountering in od ,
david i did ask admin to review posts and sort those abusive c=#ts out , i then got a friend request of the admin who wanted to get in touch , ? ie whats my email so we can chat ?declined that but waited for the trolls do be sorted out ,
nothing was sorted it just got worse , made me very angry
groups too toxic for me if you like it cool but not for me
Have you tried Debate+? The Admins there have a stronger degree of moderation.
You could also start your own thread and block the trolls from it yourself.
Newspeak is the fictional language in the novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, written by George Orwell. It is a controlled language created by the totalitarian state Oceania as a tool to limit freedom of thought, and concepts that pose a threat to the regime such as freedom, self-expression, individuality, and peace. Any form of thought alternative to the party’s construct is classified as "thoughtcrime".
Newspeak is explained in chapters 4 and 5 of Nineteen Eighty-Four, and in an appendix to the book. The language follows, for the most part, the same grammatical rules as English, but has a much more limiting, and constantly shifting, vocabulary. Any synonyms or antonyms, along with undesirable concepts, are eradicated. The goal is for everyone except the Proles — the working-class citizens of Oceania — to be speaking this language by the year 2050. In the meantime, Oldspeak (current English) is still in common usage with Newspeak interspersed into conversation.
(Extract above from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak)
There are a number of correlations in the above extract you will notice which are applicable here at Chess.com with its current policies.
When you limit or try to shuffle off some issues into a backwater, which probably would seem like you have landed in a scene from the movie Deliverance, you are then effectively, as in the movie, trapped.
'It sounds like hillybilly country there boy' is what I hear people here complaining about in the recommended sectors by the mods. Coerced to go in there, fight your way out.
And that is what it is, isn't it 'a sectioned off facilty', a break away from the main forums, kind of like a prison like enviroment if you will, deep in the south, in the marshlands.
Where security is tigher or perhaps lighter, where you are freer to express to those who regularly play on banjos & all is 'friendly in the forums', once again.
'Yippee, do da'
Now, I think most of us here get the restrictive policing or controlled language where certain individuals are a threat to the regime i.e. Chess.com
However, the other side borders on the absurd when you look at it under such umbrella terms as 'religion & politics'.
Let's brief some areas that come under these topics shall we?
The above is not an exhaustive list by any means. The point being is: 'try' to reflect or/and discuss any of the above WITHOUT the inclusion of politics and/or religion.
You will end up with a fragmented structure that make little sense.
Small wonder why the forums seem so empty as of late. Just a post or two about either topics can get some forums closed.
David, I am kind of bored with you repeating the same answer to every one who challenges the status quo here.
'Oh go to swamp land with the rest of the morons, so we can keep an eye on you. And you can fire on one brain cell & still fit in admirably'
How about considering some opinions on here & 'opening up' other options? It is getting to be highly constrictive & you guys are tightening it up for sure.
Therefore, in order to try to fit in with the controlled language, suppression of expression & individual freedom of Orwell like proportions, I am going to practice the same privileges below as a means to fit into a totalitarian ethos.
Sodsprawn you are banned from commenting on any of my posts, by leiu of your evangelical consistancy of beating the same fundamental drum over & over again.
I am recommending you go to swamp land, take your banjo with you too, as you will fit right in.
(which is exactly what you have been saying to others on here, over & over again and so too have you David)
Where did you parrot and pirate all the above C**P N/P. ?
Nikprit, you are more than welcome to start up your own group and indeed enforce the rules as you describe. I hope as many people who agree with you join your club and it becomes a vibrant, intelligent place full of meaningful and insightful discussion of all of the areas you mention including religion and politics. That's pretty much the only way that you're going to change Erik's mind on this - by demonstrating that it's actually possible and would be of genuine benefit to the community here, when his experience to date has clearly been otherwise.
Talking about it in the forums has Zero effect except to annoy the people who have heard it over and over. Such as the mods.
I don't get too concerned over the mods at all to be honest with you. They choose to do the job, I get as annoyed with you as you probably do with me.
A relationship based on mutual disrespect perhaps.
Members keep the site up & running. Without us lot, you guys as well as Erik's buisness are dead in the water.
Customer feedback is important.
I doubt that the moderators' livelihood depends on the largely volunteer work they do on this site. Erik's does, which is why he's the person you need to convince. But consider this: what's going to help Chess.com grow more? Changing the way the forums are moderated, or getting more events like the Grandmaster Blitz Battles going? Sponsoring chess tournaments? Delivering more variants? The forums aren't broken, even if they're not quite to your liking, and so very little is going to change unless a clear pain point appears, such as these black magic spammers - that HAS gotten his attention and he's finally marshalled the resources to close the door more effectively on them, which is a great relief to the moderators who have disabled literally hundreds of accounts over the last month (408 of them, in my case). This is not getting his attention - maybe if you spam his profile wall with the wall of text you posted above, that might make a difference. Or wait until he chooses to hold another "State of Chess.com" thread. Or putting it into a Support ticket. That's what works - it might not be what you like, but really, people are just going to stop listening if you keep on about it.
I think that's about it from me on this subject - I'm out. Good luck with it!
In other words I should just shut up according to you.
Yeah, okay.
Don't try & micro manage my expression please. This is Firstplay's thread, not yours.
You cut across the whole thread 'if you keep on about it' - what do you think this thread is all about? lol
Grab your banjo David.
Yeah, I hear your 'spam' suggestion loud & clear.
Erik is on my friend list, so I have direct contact. Perhaps, I will talk to the butcher not the block.
You want us to Spam Erik's wall..?
I've noticed one RARE exception. The standard format is to close any thread about religion and politics in the main forums and that's fine. But in O.D. we have a hot politics thread called, "Is Trump a Psychopath". Its amazing.
Its going on for 1000 posts and nobody's calling anybody names. Nobody's doing a vitriol speech of F-you &^#%$*(. The're being civil and providing links to backup their posts. GO FIGURE! (We also have some religious threads that originated from The Viper Room.
)
Yeah, but rumour has it in the wards (threads) you have been jockeying for a mod/staff position for 8 yrs now Ron....you would say that
I think a lot of people are tripped up by Firstplay's OP here.
Some of us are in alignment with it, some of us are 'putting from the rough' so to speak on it.
Kind of easy to figure out, who is leaning one way & who the other.
of late there vitriol is reserved for one person who supports LGBT rights
this person is continously subjected to homophobia ,
David , staff , you must take responsibility for this ,as it is your site that is allowing this to happen however inadvertantly or unintentionally