I don't really bother with keeping up with those threads, so I don't really know that much about them.
Petition to lock the various "ban low rated players from forums" threads.
Sort:
May 6, 2025
0
#143
Actually_Forgot_My_Name wrote:
thebroski555 wrote:
Actually_Forgot_My_Name wrote:
thebroski555 wrote:
StandStarter wrote:
Actually_Forgot_My_Name wrote:
To be fair, I am 99% sure that all of those posts are just ragebait, and the OPs just want reactions.
Honch's and VVS's didn't feel as trolly as some of the other ones (e.g. chomp). They felt the need to create stuff like that due to their superiority complex.
Honchkrow is really mature later down the forum, and chomper is just saying, "OHHHH under x is soooooo dumb and troll" and then something happens like downvotes and he says "OHHHH these under x noobs are down voting me just chomp on hanging pieces nooooobs". It's what he wants us to do, fueling hate and then he uses it to become noticed.
I haven't been very caught up with the uh, I guess you can call them the Forum Ragebaiters... You're saying that @Honchkrow has matured? I do agree with what you said about Chomper. Also, what happened to Very Very Stern?
Never heard of him can you link his forum to see how outreagous he is
To which one? Very Very Stern?
yea
May 6, 2025
0
#144
I think Very Very Stern got banned or something, not completely sure.
crazy
like i did not know there was drama on chess forums XD
May 6, 2025
0
#147
Actually_Forgot_My_Name wrote:
I think Very Very Stern got banned or something, not completely sure.
Refer to 21 for speculation/information.
May 6, 2025
0
#148
StandStarter wrote:
VVS got banned due to his lack of knowing whether or not something would flag the chess.com admins. He either made alt accounts or had his family make alts in the same IP, because I'm pretty sure he got banned due to the @veryverysternsWIFE and @veryverysternsDAUGHTER accounts.
May 6, 2025
0
#149
Actually_Forgot_My_Name wrote:
StandStarter wrote:
VVS got banned due to his lack of knowing whether or not something would flag the chess.com admins. He either made alt accounts or had his family make alts in the same IP, because I'm pretty sure he got banned due to the @veryverysternsWIFE and @veryverysternsDAUGHTER accounts.
Prior to those accounts being banned, they both advocated for the unmuting of VVS (he was muted for 3 weeks supposedly) and claimed to be their respective family figures. I'm not 100% but that might be the reason why he got banned, seeing as both of the other 2 accounts got banned alongside his.
knee slapper
May 6, 2025
0
#151
HangingPiecesChomper wrote:
i think #141 and #142 are the same person. they're the only 2 people who continue to bump this useless thread.
why would I make a thread, and then create an alt to bump it? I have no clue who @APersonWhoYoyos is, but I believe in this cause and so am fighting for it.
May 8, 2025
0
#153
And reminder that continuing to comment on them just makes their irrational logic seem more sound. The solution is not to keep commenting on those threads hoping to get through to the ignorant ops, it is to ignore them
May 8, 2025
0
#154
If they'll keep bumping their thread, then this thread should also be bumped, despite it being bumped already.
May 8, 2025
0
#155
This actually brings up a related question/rant that I’ve had for a while now: Why DO higher-rated players say that lower-rated players are “stupid” or make fun of them? Maybe I’m a bit biased because my lowest rating was somewhere around 200 (and I’m by no means a good player even now), but the fact that the lower-rated group is associated with the blunder icon and “500 ELO Chad” (a character created by the YouTuber “two niche”), is very saddening in my opinion. Not just for the post you mentioned, but just overall. Some content creators also represent the lower-rated group as someone who’s just “not as smart.”
Intellect shouldn’t be determined by a chess rating, and it saddens me to see lower-rated players be picked on because, at the end of the day, we’re all just trying our best, no matter what our ratings are. There’s always room for improvement, whether you’re 200, 500, 1000, 2000, or higher.
If a lower-rated player has a dream rating, they should be helped so that they can achieve it. They shouldn’t be made fun of for not already having it.
Feel free to agree or disagree with this. I was honestly really scared of making this post because I didn’t want to get caught up in the warzone, but at least this seems to be a bit less risky.
This comment was slightly off-topic, because it wasn’t necessarily about the post mentioned in the title, and it wasn’t about shadowbans, but rather about the world of chess as a whole, and the fact that, at least in my opinion, there’s a very saddening stereotype surrounding lower-rated players.
Intellect shouldn’t be determined by a chess rating, and it saddens me to see lower-rated players be picked on because, at the end of the day, we’re all just trying our best, no matter what our ratings are. There’s always room for improvement, whether you’re 200, 500, 1000, 2000, or higher.
If a lower-rated player has a dream rating, they should be helped so that they can achieve it. They shouldn’t be made fun of for not already having it.
Feel free to agree or disagree with this. I was honestly really scared of making this post because I didn’t want to get caught up in the warzone, but at least this seems to be a bit less risky.
This comment was slightly off-topic, because it wasn’t necessarily about the post mentioned in the title, and it wasn’t about shadowbans, but rather about the world of chess as a whole, and the fact that, at least in my opinion, there’s a very saddening stereotype surrounding lower-rated players.
May 8, 2025
0
#156
Considering it's against the rules to call for bans I don't see why the admins don't just agree and comply with the OPs request. The thread in question calls for players to be banned. That's against the forum rules. The mods enforce the rule in other contexts, why not here? Well, because the mods here are extremely lackluster in terms of consistency and thinking ability / are not even paid, that's the actual reason.
May 9, 2025
0
#157
crazedrat1000 wrote:
Considering it's against the rules to call for bans I don't see why the admins don't just agree and comply with the OPs request. The thread in question calls for players to be banned. That's against the forum rules. The mods enforce the rule in other contexts, why not here? Well, because the mods here are extremely lackluster in terms of consistency and thinking ability / are not even paid, that's the actual reason.
He's not serious abput banning those threads. He said that the title of the thread is satire, and just a way to call those people who make similar threads to this.
if it's satire then it's just troll ragebait and can be closed anyways right?
Also I'm not saying he's completely mature, he's just WAY more mature than chomper and isn't ragebaiting As hard