09 Jan 11
Originally posted by utherpendragonWell, gee, there is breaking the law and breaking the law, but some are more severe than others. Jaywalking and murder are both against the law, but are not subject to the same sanction (well, maybe in Texas).
An "exceptionally minor breach of the TOS"?
Is it a breach or is it a breach sh76? I missed that part where their were varying degrees of breaching the TOS.
09 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1marauderwell, imo they are being easy on him. The TOS says, "You will not create more than one account."
I'm sure you did. But having multiple accounts has not been considered an automatic reason for banning from the site. We had a case where we were discussing the introduction of Game Mods and it became obvious a certain poster was using a second account called Fingolfin(spl?). Russ himself then posted that if the user ever posted in the account again both ...[text shortened]... banned, but the rvugts one wasn't and continued playing on the site for another ten months.
it also says,
"You agree that RHP may, under certain circumstances and without prior notice, immediately terminate your RHP account,and access to the Service. Cause for such termination shall include, but not be limited to, (a) breaches or violations of the TOS.."
He has not been terminated. According to him ( I got the same PM from him that others did ,apparently) the admins said renew your sub or else. Thats only one side of the story. guess we got to take his word for it. All I know he is still here with 2 accounts.
09 Jan 11
Originally posted by utherpendragonI'm sure your opinion would be considerably different if his political philosophy was more in tune with yours.
well, imo they are being easy on him. The TOS says, "You will not create more than one account."
it also says,
"You agree that RHP may, under certain circumstances and without prior notice, immediately terminate your RHP account,and access to the Service. Cause for such termination shall include, but not be limited to, (a) breaches or violations ...[text shortened]... he story. guess we got to take his word for it. All I know he is still here with 2 accounts.
The creating of second accounts is not unprecedented and what is done about them has varied with the "why" someone did so. The usual automatic bannings were for those individuals who created a second account and played games against it to boost their ratings. Also if someone created a second account to harass another user this has earned automatic bans in the past. Creating a second account for the fairly innocuous reasons FMF did has never earned a ban in the past. Also, I've never heard of a "subscribe or else" option in these cases. It seems odd knowing what I know about the Admins.
09 Jan 11
Originally posted by no1maraudersounds odd to me too but thats what he is claiming.
I'm sure your opinion would be considerably different if his political philosophy was more in tune with yours.
The creating of second accounts is not unprecedented and what is done about them has varied with the "why" someone did so. The usual automatic bannings were for those individuals who created a second account and played games aga ...[text shortened]... bscribe or else" option in these cases. It seems odd knowing what I know about the Admins.
09 Jan 11
Originally posted by kmax87Yes.
Been pm'd by the articulate one who will be giving the site up completely. He had stopped using his fmf accnt and had created jwb which was contrary to the tos.This he acknowledges, but he was not using it for chess ratings gain. He's been advised to become a sub or be deleted, which he feels is unfair. I said he should fight to stay on but he feels its time to move on..
I will miss him....Will you?
It's totally absurd.
09 Jan 11
Originally posted by kmax87"We come to bury Caesar, not to praise him."
...you lot are a tough crowd!
I will miss FMF but not JWB. I'm slightly surprised by his action, since interacting with someone through several identities is disorienting (fun in a masked ball, but tedious otherwise -- good enough reason to ban the practice.)
But people with a very strong internal compass will sometimes challenge the system, won't they? Win or lose, that's something they do.
09 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by utherpendragonYes, you either break the law or you don't, so it would be reasonable to give speeders and murderers the same sentence.
An "exceptionally minor breach of the TOS"?
Is it a breach or is it a breach sh76? I missed that part where their were varying degrees of breaching the TOS.
Edit: darn, hose 11.
09 Jan 11
Originally posted by sh76we are not talking about the law. we are talking about the TOS of a privately owned web site and the contract we entered into.
Well, gee, there is breaking the law and breaking the law, but some are more severe than others. Jaywalking and murder are both against the law, but are not subject to the same sanction (well, maybe in Texas).
09 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by utherpendragonNobody is arguing that the site admins have no right or authority to do what they did. They clearly do. The question is whether it is right that they did what they did.
we are not talking about the law. we are talking about the TOS of a privately owned web site and the contract we entered into.
I believe that it was not.
09 Jan 11
2 edits
Originally posted by sh76Right to do what? What he did is a violation of the TOS and a reason to immediately terminate his accounts. The admins sent him the standard 3a) notice, he decided not to explain himself to them.
Nobody is arguing that the site admins have no right or authority to do what they did. They clearly do. The question is whether it is right that they did what they did.
I believe that it was not.
I'll miss him and his posts, but him trying to pin the blame on the admins is poor form. He could have gone with more dignity.
09 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaTerminating JWB and allowing FMF to remain a non-sub account (or vice versa) would have been more reasonable.
Right to do what? What he did is a violation of the TOS and a reason to immediately terminate his accounts. The admins sent him the standard 3a) notice, he decided not to explain himself to them.
09 Jan 11
1 edit
Originally posted by sh76The admins do not know the reasons why he did what he did and I don't see why they should. Like I said before, if he thinks there were mitigating circumstances (and I think there were) it was up to him to justify himself. He declined.
Terminating JWB and allowing FMF to remain a non-sub account (or vice versa) would have been more reasonable.