A Report Button

I think we need one of those on chess.com. I hate tattling, but just look at the Clock Hacking thread's 2 to 3 most recent pages. When the report button is clicked, the reporter must explain who and why, and a mod will review it. It would help cut down on flame throwers.

And also a "report" button for Live Chess too

Yes, that would be nice 

Pfft, you informers.

The classic structure.  When you see "I don't ---- , but" or "I hate ---- , but" or a similar setup, you know whatever precedes the comma is a suspect statement.  In this case the OP hates tattling so much he wants a button right there so he can do it much more easily. 

It seems to have escaped you somehow during your 1 month of membership, but the "moderators" in the forums are already quite active.  Moreover, there are already ways to contact staff if you feel the need.  It's not as easy as clicking a button right next to every forum comment, and that's a good thing, not a bad one.

However, a report button on live chess might be a worthwhile addition, since there is a time element and if possible one might want assistance/intervention during the game.

 "In this case the OP hates tattling so much he wants a button right there so he can do it much more easily."  Cystem

Hilarious!

Per the Cheating Forum's sticky FAQ:

How do I report someone I think is cheating?
If you are suspicious about somebody cheating, please use the Report Abuse link found at the bottom of any Chess.com page...

Here is the actual URL:

http://support.chess.com/index.php?_m=tickets&_a=submit

Sadly it is not intuitive.

You click on "Help and Support" then "Contact Us."

This brings you to the URL that I posted earlier.

Oh.  (This thread can't die soon enough.)

You'll need to update your post to include the post numbers from that thread. Pages 6 and 7 have shown that it has lost its original train of thought (as well as the OP's interest).

Page 6 and 7 have shown the maturation of the thread. Since it's developement and function in society has been disclosed, page 6 and 7 manifests a new dawn on the literary horizon. The "author's" absence is merely a casualty of growth.

That's not how it looked like to Erik who has locked the thread.

I quote: "A shame to see an interesting thread ruined by silliness. Chessocity, I've messaged you. We can take this helpful conversation offline."

Not bad for someone who is "not a moderator," eh? (Per ilikeflags in post#85 of that thread.)

Uhhh, if a player is using a computer and they are only 1200, then they aren't using the computer very well....

Here in chess.com, the staffers would be more suspicous of players of using engines when they have a rating of 2000 or higher.

 I thought Erik was way out of line for locking that topic. It does make me think that maybe there is a lot more to clock hacking than they want to admit to. Pity chessocity didn't come with the evidence though.

I doubt if chessocity wanted to share the actual exploit with the chess.com community anyway.

And with regards to the staffers' methodologies, they are not open about the security measures for online cheating. That's what I learned in that "bubble" called Cheating Forum.

Was he out of line? I think he really just let the discussion grow to be able to encourage more people to share similar experiences. Otherwise, the thread would have been moved into the Cheating Forum discussions so as not to "damage" the rest of the community with the "hogwash" discussion. (Per BlackWaive in post #83)

EDIT