FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
1. I have read the terms of service completely and I don't think its a moderators place to determine whether a specific post in a thread is "useless or distracting". I have a thread where the GAME is to post completely random and unrelated things in sequence.
2. Question: When you say mentioning competitor sites, what if I post a game I played on another website on to the forum for analysis? That's not advertising.
3. Its not fair at all to the creator of a thread to have a thread locked when they have 0 control over what even their friends post. And if a thread is moving at a quick pace, its easy to miss something someone posted to know if they should be blocked or not.
are you referring to your own thread?
"They shouldn't lock threads over 1 flame war"?
No, ANY thread
You claim to have read The Terms Of Service (TOS) but only quote two parts. It is the moderator's job to view and determine if the content posted breaches TOS. Furthermore the OP has a responsibility to ensure that the thread is not de-railed and breaches of TOS occur. The OP has the ability to block any member that post items that breach TOS. I have locked many threads where somebody has made a personal attack on another member when TOS clearly states Chess.com is a friendly place and to be on your best behaviour. So I take it by saying no thread should be locked that you approve of harassment and bullying. You mentioned competitor sites and you could post the game you mentioned yet without mentioning any other site.
Whether your points are valid or not, is beside the point. This is an internet website, and you dont have the same rights, that you have in reali life. In fact...you have no rights online.
You really are warping what I said out of control. And what is this with "derailed" threads? This is a place where people chat and will talk about many different things. Who cares if a thread stays on topic? People should be free to discuss what they want as long as it's not nasty or something that will open a can of worms. And only quoting 2 parts doesn't prove anything. Those are the main parts that are problematic.
Question: Why was the thread about locking threads before this locked?
Ur telling me that if I even MENTION the name of another chess site, it gets banned?
... And what is this with "derailed" threads? This is a place where people chat and will talk about many different things. Who cares if a thread stays on topic? People should be free to discuss what they want as long as it's not nasty or something that will open a can of worms.
Apparently, the creators of chess.com care since they included the following in the ToS which you read:
Member ConductYou agree to not use the Service to: -post any comments, text, messages, or links in the forums or any public comments that is off topic or irrelevant to the purpose and content of the original content, game, article, blog, or forum topic;
This rule is one that mods have historically evoked loosely and sparsely ... but it's still the rule.
Threads get locked for a variety of reasons and probably a lot less often than is called for.
" and I don't think its a moderators place to determine whether a specific post in a thread is "useless or distracting". "
You don't have to agree with them and you have the ability and right to contact support to argue against them, but it's precisely a mod's responsibility to make determinations and take actions according to their own guidelines.
this is eventually going to turn into a flame war about flame wars...
and two mods have already visited...
No, it shouldn't unless the mention is interpreted to be a suggestion that people play there instead of here. A casual or neutral mention of a competitor is perfectly ok. The idea is that one shouldn't use chess.com as a platform to advertise competitors. One may not drawn comparisons between sites either, regardless of whom that comparison favors.
Not hardly. I'm here to elucidate, not escalate.
No, it shouldn't unless the mention is interpreted to be a suggestion that people play there instead of here. A casual or neutral mention of a competitor is perfectly ok. the idea is that one shouldn't use chess.com as a platform to advertise competitors. One may not drawn comparisons between sites either, regardless of whom that comparison favors.
I'm confused. If we are talking about whether we should play on Chess.com vs another competitor, we will get muted and the thread will get locked? No comparing?
So, basically no conversing about other websites due to advertising?
Well, good luck keeping track of and reading through the thousands of threads in the forums, some of which have 10,000 posts on them, and reason through what's relevant and not relevant. And u keep repeating that is in the terms of service. I KNOW THAT. I would just appreciate an explanation if possible. That's all.
Yeah. That's all they're saying.
It's not completely about advertising. Feel free to say what you like or don't like about playing here, but once you start comparing vs specific site, things tend to snowball. I think it's more a matter of maintaining decorum (and the possible advertising that would inadvertently creep in).
That's not what I've witnessed. Lichess has been taken down by moderators more times than I can count when mentioned.
Juny, delete that post now, or this threads getting locked
It all goes back to that war, doesn't it? We can't just debate in peace without some guy ruining it for everybody?
BTW, can mods unlock threads?
Shrug... I can only talk about general guidelines mods use. How things are interpreted is situational.
Since one can't predict where a post will lead, it might be wise just to avoid those trigger topics completely, at least in the forums.