- Joined
- 06 Nov 15
- Moves
- 41301
An unfortunate scourge: This issue is challenging site credibility.
How is it that they've become tolerated here?
Verification security and tracking are now accepted and commonplace practices throughout the internet.
Is it technologically impossible or unrealistic to expect that multiple accounts might be prevented here?
This is a competitive chess site. We have a very bright base of membership.
Why are we tolerant of such chronic mockery?
@wolfe63 saidIt is still against the TOS, the question is about enforcement.
An unfortunate scourge: This issue is challenging site credibility.
How is it that they've become tolerated here?
Verification security and tracking are now accepted and commonplace practices throughout the internet.
Is it technologically impossible or unrealistic to expect that multiple accounts might be prevented here?
This is a competitive chess site. We have a very bright base of membership.
Why are we tolerant of such chronic mockery?
Probably if you send feedback detailing the problem there will be progress (but you should know very well that you deal with that). If you can show that rating fraud is committed you will be more successful than if you only have a problem on the Forums I fear...
@wolfe63 saidYou are bound to get a few bad apples.
An unfortunate scourge: This issue is challenging site credibility.
How is it that they've become tolerated here?
Verification security and tracking are now accepted and commonplace practices throughout the internet.
Is it technologically impossible or unrealistic to expect that multiple accounts might be prevented here?
This is a competitive chess site. We have a very bright base of membership.
Why are we tolerant of such chronic mockery?
I've seen multiple accounts banned, but not so many recently.
I suggest if you notice anything to report it directly to Russ.
He will do something about it as he doesn't want this happening either.
-VR
@earl-of-trumps saidI believe sometimes it is done so they can hide under another alias and not use the one they would normally use. Other times it may be done for playing chess, winning with one and losing with other(s). Another way to try and cheat for points! It has all been done in the past, and sooner or later they do get caught up with.
Although I look askew at a person who feels another identity is desirable, I don't see
how a second account makes for a stronger chess player, in and of itself.
just my 2 cents.
You see something doesn't look right report it, no one wants someone cheating on the site, in my humble opinion.
-VR
@ponderable saidThe statement:
It is still against the TOS, the question is about enforcement.
Probably if you send feedback detailing the problem there will be progress (but you should know very well that you deal with that). If you can show that rating fraud is committed you will be more successful than if you only have a problem on the Forums I fear...
The forums are the core of the 'Red Hot Pawn Chess' community.
Is very different to the statement:
If you can show that rating fraud is committed you will be more successful than if you only have a problem on the Forums I fear...
@ghost-of-a-duke saidi came for the chess that's true
Yes, 'chess' is the core of the site, the glue that holds everything else together. It's what brought us here.
but when grampy bobby told me i should be more respectful
that's when i made the place my home
@ghost-of-a-duke saidI was at caissa.com and came here after they started heavy-handedly censoring their forums.
I came for the chess,
stayed for the mess.
@wolfe63 said
Members with Multiple Accounts.
About 10 years ago, on the Debates Forum, I stopped posting with "FMF" and used an account called "John W. Booth" instead for a few weeks and, as a practical joke, in order to come at a couple of ludicrous but prolific very far-right posters called utherpendragon and generalissimo ...in order to come at them from an even nuttier extreme on the right.
I let most regular posters in on the joke by PM. It was kind of funny for a while. I was finally "outed" and I apologized to those who'd been taken in by it or who felt it was a bit cavalier.
Last year and going back a few years, the episode was STILL being used on the Spirituality Forum by one or two desperate posters to assert ~ by way of deflection from whatever was being discussed ~ that nothing I'd posted about my beliefs [past and present] on the forum during the subsequent years, including my denials that I was a paedophile [!] ~ could be trusted because the "John W. Booth" episode had demonstrated that I was a "liar"!
This all seems rather quaint now when you see the huge number of people posting 'for the first time' and yet they have knowledge and axes to grind with reference to things going back years.
@suzianne saidyou're kidding me. I know old Loki there. We were on the same chess team.
I was at caissa.com and came here after they started heavy-handedly censoring their forums.
I must have left before you arrived because I was there very early.
KellyJay is here, as is another member that I knew there (can't recall).
@fmf saidOutrageous, they picked up on one action and tried to use it to define you.
@wolfe63 said
Members with Multiple Accounts.
About 10 years ago, on the Debates Forum, I stopped posting with "FMF" and used an account called "John W. Booth" instead for a few weeks and, as a practical joke, in order to come at a couple of ludicrous but prolific very far-right posters called utherpendragon and generalissimo ...in order to come at them [i]from ...[text shortened]... first time' and yet they have knowledge and axes to grind with reference to things going back years.