If you are honestly looking for an answer and not merely intending to stir the proverbial pot, you'll notice if you read carefully that it says "debate or commentary", not "no one shall be allowed to congregate on the basis of...".
Sheesh.
Religion & Chess.com
Sort:
Rael wrote:
If you are honestly looking for an answer and not merely intending to stir the proverbial pot, you'll notice if you read carefully that it says "debate or commentary", not "no one shall be allowed to congregate on the basis of...".
Sheesh.
1. Stirring a pot is not such a bad thing as you make it sound. It is a thought provoking exercise. In this particular case, there seems to be some inconsistency in chess.com's policy because the spirit behind banning religous/political discussions is lost if groups are formed based on the very same subjects.
2. Perhaps I was too telegraphic in my expression - I thought it was self explanatory. What I meant to say is that if religous and political discussions are a "No No" (the reason given is that they are divisive), then so should be group names and formation of groups based on religous or political beliefs.
you just can't avoid topics like that now can ya?
Eric (staff) states
"...
#3 - No religious or political debate or commentary in these forums. Religion and politics are important and deeply personal, but Chess.com is a friendly community where we come together around a common love for chess and debating these two topics tend to pull people apart."
And yet there are groups which have religion based names. Why is that allowed on chess.com ?