Non-Members should be able to make clubs and promote to SA

Hi Dan - my post about blocking just now was in response to another member who seemed to suggest paying members shouldn't have to read posts from 'freeloaders'.
I'll quote his post in my next post.
And add a bit there.

One doesn't have to read anything at all.
But - 'experiments' that the site has tried:
One was to allow admins of clubs an option (buttons) to promote and demote - instead of just superadmins of clubs and club owners with that option and buttons.
Hey - it didn't work. Putting it mildly.
How did it happen? Why would the site even have considered it?
Probably because of pressure from large groups of members.
Most of the time though - when the website makes a change or adds a feature ... its a Good change or a Good feature!
Or Great change or Great feature!
Definitely.
There was a change that limited chess.com members to joining 200 clubs only - maximum 200. A software change. Not a 'rule'.
In other words much more effective than a 'rule'.
I hope they still have that in effect.
But at the same time - there was what I think was a mistake ...
and that was to allow Unlimited club creation by any individual member.
In other words it appears the site allowed paying or nonpaying members to make an unlimited number of new clubs - like 1000 or even 10,000 if he/she wanted or chose.
So there was at least one character who joined 200 clubs and then proceeded to make about 1000 more - in addition to having several accounts.
Is allowing such a thing going to help with 'server overload'?
I hope they fixed that one.
But - its a privately owned website.
Nobody's forced to be here. (by the way - there's an official Feedback club on this website)
😎

Hey Brother, most of us have been young and "poor" as part of our growing and maturation process. Being a "poor" college student does not warrant you going around and asking for free handouts. I bet there are many people how are in a worse situation than you. They were not supported by their family, friends, or community during their education process; maybe they didn't have what it takes to get a college scholarship; maybe they had some bitterness like you.

But...there is a spectrum as to who is "rich" and "poor", and that all depends on where you are at on the economic scale. I can't afford Fararri or a private jet, but I have been able to purchase a vehicle and purchase an airline ticket. I'm not mad at those people how have more material things or private memberships. I am happy with what I have been able to obtain on my own through working hard.

If you are on a scholarship, then you are far ahead of many other kids who want a college degree. Quit griping about people not giving your free things/access; get your education; get a job; make and save some money; good things will come to you.

In the meantime, go listen to some Rolling Stones. There's a really great song that was written about this subject.

I'm thinking that part of the reason chess.com allows free membership - is that they have kids in mind.
But there are other reasons.
They know that if people try the site free - they may switch to paying later to get more options and features.
The site also knows that having millions of nonpaying members means those nonpayers will rightly tell other people its a good website and that many of those others will start as paying members or become paying sooner or later.
In other words - free members gives free advertising.
And free members being here - means they're not at some other chess site or are there less.
All part of 'getting the market'.
This site probably has a superb marketing department.

Also many of the nonpaying members are good chessplayers and contribute to the site that way.
And many of the nonpayers contribute to the site in other ways too.

Well said, @playerafar.

I might add that there is an addictive component to chess.com, as well as any other online platform. You get people onto your platform; give them a taste of what the action is like; limit some of the options; and BOOM! They want to subscribe.

There are also different platforms for different people and their varied tastes. I tried 4 or 5 platforms before finally submitting my credit card info for a paying membership on chess.com. I occasionally go back to the other platforms and use my free membership there, but I always come back here.

Thank you @Boone2023 !

i'm unsure what you are attempting to gain by posting a dictionary definition, but, it appears you are assuming quite a bit.

just because people don't pay does not mean they do not contribute to the site. this works in a few different ways, including the freeloaders seeing the advertising.

on your last statement, you are not required to read the posts of said freeloaders.

It would be very interesting to see what chess dot com would do to free players if they ever got a monopoly. They'd have to balance their desire for more profit against the benefits of allowing access to games for free, One thing that free players provide is a large pool. From a certain perspective they are paying with their time by playing on this site. I could imagine however chess dot com setting a limit of games you could play each day, unless you buy a membership. If my logic is sound it is possible that non-paying players get to play here as many games as they wish because Liches exists.

Non-paying members can't make a club?
Who says so?
I'm not a paying member.
I've been able to make clubs and also to promote people.
Has that been changed?
When?

Regarding what should be:
I believe there should be a limit on how many clubs one can join - and also how many one can make.
Whether paying or non-paying.
There is a limit.
One can only join 200 clubs.
That's a good thing.
But the number of clubs one makes should be part of the same limit.
Members often complain that the site lags.
Including in their chess games.

There's only so much data a server can take - regardless how gigantic and powerful its business computers are.
There was at least one person who had multiple accounts who apparently made over a thousand clubs with just one account alone.
That 'helps' the computer server of this website?
Try ... No. It doesn't help.

The opening post here is dated January 2020 ...
maybe somebody here already commented that it was fixed since then.
I haven't gone back through all 170 posts.

Regarding a 200 club limit - for joining and making - paying or non-paying ...
200 clubs isn't enough?
50 clubs is a Lot. A big number.
There's millions of members.
There's not going to be a big enough total number of clubs on the website?
Come on now.

I am the owner of 2 groups currently I am the sole super admin in both groups I can promote any member to small admin or to coordinator but you are right about one thing you have to be paid member to be promoted to super admin.

A small admin can remove a member except the super admin a coordinator can't.

Your statement about removing a member would insure I would not promote you.

I ask my small admins not to remove anybody it must be a decision made by all admins

I am a nonpaying member and as an experiment I just tried to create a club.
I was successful.
Took me 30 seconds or so.
I called the club x60z.
This means I am not only the owner but am also a superadmin in the club.
I can promote somebody else to superadmin or admin or coordinator.
I can also demote - mute - ban - lock - delete and of course block.
I will now disable that club.
Point: nothing appears to have changed.
You don't have to be a paying member to create a club and be owner and superadmin in that club.

Duck Dung