but we have to wait for about 10-20 years for the current boom crop of Beth Harmon chess kids to leave their parent's homes at about 30 and become fully functioning adults.
Do you think some of the parents might want to rent out their room (just thinking ahead)?
My gripe is with the administrators. You should have a vision for what you want the forums to be, and then have moderators who will facilitate it.
Chess.com opened its doors before any chess-playing capabilities had been incorporated into the site. The forums were pretty much the "face" of chess.com, backed up by blogs and articles (although I think my friend @billwall -now @minichess - had the only published articles when I joined on June 13, 2007). Sometime in Aug. 2007, Daily Chess was released. Around Feb., 2008 Live Chess started in a Beta version. This was probably the impetus for memberships to skyrocket.
Still, for years the forums were out front. Erik and other staff visited them often and for the most part they attracted mature individuals even if some of those were trolls. At that time children were discouraged from chess.com. Chesskids was created at some point and this offered a very controlled environment (if rather juvenile) where parents didn't have to worry about content. Somewhere along the line all this was scrapped and Quantity became god. The more people, the better. That this is supposedly a chess site became secondary. The forums became the haven of the Least Common Denominator and nobody in management every seems to care outside of some passing nod. Now they care even less. and Quantity isn't only a god, it's the Only God. About the only rule that is sacrosanct is the no-mention-of-cheating rule. Even this rule once had meaning since it discouraged tons of garbage posts... but now garbage posts are ignored (and by extension, encouraged) but that one rule persists without any of its original merit.
There IS indeed a vision... but it's not one that puts chess or quality first, if those two things have any place at all anymore.
Sounds about right, thanks for the insight.
Eventually, the "hi" posts will actually drive posters away...but we have to wait for about 10-20 years for the current boom crop of Beth Harmon chess kids to leave their parent's homes at about 30 and become fully functioning adults.
Hmmm...I sound cynical today.
Somehow I doubt @Erik is thinking that far ahead. After a good run, a decade or 1.5, he'll sell it off and retire.
Like all successful businessmen, it took a good deal of luck, circumstance, and (parent's) money... nothing of intrinsic value.
For loving chess, we're the fools.
Maybe like Sinquifield he'll earn his millions and rub elbows with the world champ when he's in his 70s.
Of course at that point, like Rex, he'll be embarrassed for his armature abilities.
Some people earn money due to circumstance, and some people actually make something of themselves.
Not very commonly.
How would you know that ?
It's a symptom of having a big brain.
Maybe like Sinquifield he'll earn his millions and rub elbows with the world champ when he's in his 70s.
Of course at that point, like Rex, he'll be embarrassed for his armature abilities.
Some people earn money due to circumstance, and some people actually make something of themselves.
I’d kind of like to do both.
You make a lot of assumptions.
You only think you're smart because of your pathology.
Not very commonly.
How would you know that ?
I pretty much have an idea.
Mutes have traditionally been a last resort after warnings failed to produce the desired results, and most of those were short mutes - more like attention getters than some sort of punishment. Generally, just speaking to someone was enough. Most people are pretty reasonable. Then they started with the goofy autobots that muted people for language and spam (I think). Not too long ago it seems to have become the habit for some to give ridiculously long mutes (a year perhaps) with the purpose of forcing the person to write to Support in order to extract all sorts of promises concerning their behavior. I never did like that approach since I felt it was somewhat belittling.
In my experience, mutes are a lot less common than people think... but closing of accounts is a lot more frequent than most people think since so many of those occurred before the persons ever had the opportunity to start trouble.
tell us about my "pathology" then
I don't know much about it personally, but at this point it's become something of legend, yeah?
I just dismantled your statement about mutes not being very common
Yeah, you really dismantled it.
I'm really feelin' the burn, let me tell ya.
tell us about my "pathology" then
I don't know much about it personally, but at this point it's become something of legend, yeah?
You don't know much about it, but you care to make a thing of it ???
Shouldn't you get to know about it first...then if you need to..make a comment after that ?
No, I don't care to make a "thing of it."
You're the one provoking me, so I'm answering.
I just dismantled your statement about mutes not being very common
Yeah, you really dismantled it.
I'm really feelin' the burn, let me tell ya.
Well you probably are actually........indifference is the sign of not giving a damn....you don't make a comment like that unless you are "burned" or whatever..
Know that old saying ?
"Methinks the Llama protesteth too much ?
Yeah , you clearly read Shakespeare in Highschool. Good for you.
Again, how do you know that these loony bot automutes are not common.
I presume you must have heard enough about them to make the comments about them you just did ?
Is there a count done of these ?
I rather doubt it, no private company likes to display its "sins" voluntarily.
You usually have to drag it out of them
I think autobot muting happens mosty in Live Chess. In messages and the forums, they tend to block rather than mute (although I've seen mutes too) The exception is spamming...I don't know the criteria, but if someone sends too many messages they could get muted.
I've given you my take based on my experience. You can take it or leave it.
I just dismantled your statement about mutes not being very common
Yeah, you really dismantled it.
I'm really feelin' the burn, let me tell ya.
Well you probably are actually........indifference is the sign of not giving a damn....you don't make a comment like that unless you are "burned" or whatever..
Know that old saying ?
"Methinks the Llama protesteth too much ?
Yeah , you clearly read Shakespeare in Highschool. Good for you.
Ha! I HAD to read Shakespeare in High School. The only thing it’s good for is being a contestant on Jeopardy!
People pay you?
Isn't it the opposite?
You buy memberships to gain attention.
Or have you forgotten already?
I just dismantled your statement about mutes not being very common
Yeah, you really dismantled it.
I'm really feelin' the burn, let me tell ya.
Well you probably are actually........indifference is the sign of not giving a damn....you don't make a comment like that unless you are "burned" or whatever..
Know that old saying ?
"Methinks the Llama protesteth too much ?
Yeah , you clearly read Shakespeare in Highschool. Good for you.
Ha! I HAD to read Shakespeare in High School. The only thing it’s good for is being a contestant on Jeopardy!
They make kids read a lot of quality stuff when they're too young and dumb to appreciate it.
I don't whether it has a good effect... probably very minimal.
Usually to appreciate something you have to rediscover it as an adult.
My gripe is with the administrators. You should have a vision for what you want the forums to be, and then have moderators who will facilitate it.
Chess.com opened its doors before any chess-playing capabilities had been incorporated into the site. The forums were pretty much the "face" of chess.com, backed up by blogs and articles (although I think my friend @billwall -now @minichess - had the only published articles when I joined on June 13, 2007). Sometime in Aug. 2007, Daily Chess was released. Around Feb., 2008 Live Chess started in a Beta version. This was probably the impetus for memberships to skyrocket.
Still, for years the forums were out front. Erik and other staff visited them often and for the most part they attracted mature individuals even if some of those were trolls. At that time children were discouraged from chess.com. Chesskids was created at some point and this offered a very controlled environment (if rather juvenile) where parents didn't have to worry about content. Somewhere along the line all this was scrapped and Quantity became god. The more people, the better. That this is supposedly a chess site became secondary. The forums became the haven of the Least Common Denominator and nobody in management every seems to care outside of some passing nod. Now they care even less. and Quantity isn't only a god, it's the Only God. About the only rule that is sacrosanct is the no-mention-of-cheating rule. Even this rule once had meaning since it discouraged tons of garbage posts... but now garbage posts are ignored (and by extension, encouraged) but that one rule persists without any of its original merit.
There IS indeed a vision... but it's not one that puts chess or quality first, if those two things have any place at all anymore.
Sounds about right, thanks for the insight.
Eventually, the "hi" posts will actually drive posters away...but we have to wait for about 10-20 years for the current boom crop of Beth Harmon chess kids to leave their parent's homes at about 30 and become fully functioning adults.
Hmmm...I sound cynical today.
Now, that is funny. Keep the cynicism alive and well my friend.