Hmmm, one issue that immediately springs to mind is that lower rated players would not only be barred from commenting, but also from asking questions.
Raising the Bar (Restricting who can post)
Sort:
Jan 26, 2010
0
#3
rooperi wrote: Hmmm, one issue that immediately springs to mind is that lower rated players would not only be barred from commenting, but also from asking questions.
True, but it could provide incentive to raise your game so that you could ask a question - perhaps about how to raise your game.
Another issue is that I might have FIDE rating of 2000 and will not be allowed to post just because I joined the site yeasterday.
What if I never played a CC (thus a rating of 1200) but have 2400 in live chess?
Yet another issue is, what if I'm low rated but have something very important to say on the topic?
Another issue is that this might make the forum elitist and unfriendly and, thus, reduce the enjoyment of member.
Jan 26, 2010
0
#5
...don't like this idea. We should be able to weed through bad questions and suggestions just like weeding through bad moves. It would be like limiting membership based on IQ.
We should also petition to have the following optional limits on threads:
- Minimum and maximum age limits
- Gender
- Sensitivity level to lactose
- Membership in the Ministry of Silly Walks
- To die alone. In the rain.
I second the Gastro... whatever that is.
Jan 26, 2010
0
#9
ninevah wrote:
Another issue is that I might have FIDE rating of 2000 and will not be allowed to post just because I joined the site yeasterday.
What if I never played a CC (thus a rating of 1200) but have 2400 in live chess?
Yet another issue is, what if I'm low rated but have something very important to say on the topic?
Another issue is that this might make the forum elitist and unfriendly and, thus, reduce the enjoyment of member.
I was thinking in terms of very specific, technical topics such as analysis of a game. On a general topic dealing with behaviour (e.g. resigning or stalling), one would usually seek to attract the broadest spectrum of views.
Regarding accidentally excluding GMs who lacked an appropriate CC rating: that would be the OP's loss.
It is undeniably elitist, but it would apply to selected topics only - not to the whole forum.
Enormous_Gastropod wrote:
We should also petition to have the following optional limits on threads:
Minimum and maximum age limits Gender Sensitivity level to lactose Membership in the Ministry of Silly Walks To die alone. In the rain.Absolutely.
Perhaps there could be a questionaire, and a panel who decides who qualifies to post in which topic. Or members and topics could be colour-coded, and you're only allowed to post in the appropriate colour. The possibilities are endless.
And as we know the limit of who should be eligible to comment or post starts at your rating -9.
Jan 26, 2010
0
#13
When the Roman wanted to endorse something, they gave it a 'thumbs down'. By contrast, 'thumbs up' meant they thought you sucked.
then... I am Sparticus 
Conversely, what about a maximum rating for submitting posts? Some beginners may not want a 2400+ player hyperventilating over their horrific piece hangs.
Jan 26, 2010
0
#17
modernchess wrote:
Conversely, what about a maximum rating for submitting posts? Some beginners may not want a 2400+ player hyperventilating over their horrific piece hangs.
Quite, and there's good reason to exclude particular ratings - 1337, for instance.
Vote Post (...)
modernchess wrote:
Conversely, what about a maximum rating for submitting posts? Some beginners may not want a 2400+ player hyperventilating over their horrific piece hangs.
That's true too.
artfizz wrote:
A potentially interesting feature would be to be able to impose a lower rating limit on who can add comments to a topic.
For instance, if you post a game played between 1500's for discussion, but you wish to exclude - let us say for the sake of argument - anyone with a rating below 1350 from posting comments.
Such a rating exclusion would naturally apply to the originator also.
Would this raise the quality of the debate - or would this merely be more divisive?
although it wont work, I def. see where youre coming from. my past account here I was rated 1850 and whenever I would ask a question in the opening forum (say, about a 12th move sideline) and hope for a 2100+ to answer me.
but insted I would get 20 comments from 1300 players saying "the grunfeld defense is a hypermodern opening, and is a response to 1.d4. white can avoid it by playing 1.e4" or something along those lines.
as frustrating as it is we all were at the bottom of the totem pole at one time so I dont think its good to exclude them
A potentially interesting feature would be to be able to impose a lower rating limit on who can add comments to a topic.
For instance, if you post a game played between 1500's for discussion, but you wish to exclude - let us say for the sake of argument - anyone with a rating below 1350 from posting comments.
Such a rating exclusion would naturally apply to the originator also.
Would this raise the quality of the debate - or would this merely be more divisive?