Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Site Ideas Forum

Site Ideas Forum

  1. 31 May '07 12:45
    ... members have made say 500, 750 or 1,000 moves.

    That will get rid of so much dross from the forums.

    The only forum newbies should have access to post in is the help forum.

    Yes/No/alternatives?
  2. 31 May '07 14:29
    No.

    Many of the trash postings are made by people having been here for a long time. Better to filter them out in some way.
  3. Standard member c99ux
    'Sir' to you
    31 May '07 14:54
    Originally posted by adramforall
    ... members have made say 500, 750 or 1,000 moves.

    That will get rid of so much dross from the forums.

    The only forum newbies should have access to post in is the [b]help forum
    .

    Yes/No/alternatives?[/b]
    2,500 for non-subs?
  4. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    31 May '07 15:58
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    What do we do about the idiots with more than 1000 moves?
  5. Standard member smw6869
    Granny
    31 May '07 18:01
    Originally posted by adramforall
    ... members have made say 500, 750 or 1,000 moves.

    That will get rid of so much dross from the forums.

    The only forum newbies should have access to post in is the [b]help forum
    .

    Yes/No/alternatives?[/b]
    It's like this: This is a market driven economy. RHP needs paid subs to help make ends meet. If you make members jump thru hoops to enjoy the site, they will simply leave rhp. And then, mister know it all, you and all the other elitists will have to pay $599.99 to play on the site. It's up to you. And, please, enough with the dross!
  6. Standard member SwissGambit
    Caninus Interruptus
    31 May '07 18:21
    The post that was quoted here has been removed
    I understand the frustration with spammers, but is it really a good solution to shut out responsible forum posters who are not highly interested in corr. chess?
  7. 01 Jun '07 02:27
    Originally posted by SwissGambit
    I understand the frustration with spammers, but is it really a good solution to shut out responsible forum posters who are not highly interested in corr. chess?
    Yep, after all the main function of the site is to play chess.
  8. 01 Jun '07 02:37
    Originally posted by smw6869
    It's like this: This is a market driven economy. RHP needs paid subs to help make ends meet. If you make members jump thru hoops to enjoy the site, they will simply leave rhp. And then, mister know it all, you and all the other elitists will have to pay $599.99 to play on the site. It's up to you. And, please, enough with the dross!
    Take a look at the removed players.

    http://www.redhotpawn.com/comhub/removedplayers.php

    Many of them were paid subscribers but they are being removed for engine use etc. If so market driven why remove paying members?

    Many of the multiple account holders are just doing so to fart about in the forums. Removing the ability to post in the forums until a certain number of moves have been made will stop these idiots from starting new accounts once banned, as they will need to make a prescribed number of moves before being able to post again.

    This saves the admins time and therefore money. Adnins will then be able to concentrate on bettering the site rather than dealing with the idiotic multi account holders.

    mr know it all elitist lol that surely has to be the overstatement of the year! Because I put forward an idea I become a knowitall elitist. < splits sides laughing >
  9. Standard member smw6869
    Granny
    01 Jun '07 04:04
    Originally posted by adramforall
    Take a look at the removed players.

    http://www.redhotpawn.com/comhub/removedplayers.php

    Many of them were paid subscribers but they are being removed for engine use etc. If so market driven why remove paying members?

    Many of the multiple account holders are just doing so to fart about in the forums. Removing the ability to post in the forums u ...[text shortened]... year! Because I put forward an idea I become a knowitall elitist. < splits sides laughing >
    I was replying to your original post. You said nothing about engine abuse, multiple sccounts, etc. Of course cheaters should be
    removed from the site. But why should that have any affect on someone paying 60 bucks having to wait for your permission to have full accsee to the site? Of course it's a chess site, but THEY offer the forums also. Who are you to tell anyone what they should be doing on the site as long as it's not cheating. Oh yeah, using books, databases and whatnot is cheating in my moronic brain. Get down off your lofty perch dude, and. ah, startplaying more chess
  10. Standard member Phlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    01 Jun '07 04:25
    Originally posted by smw6869
    I was replying to your original post. You said nothing about engine abuse, multiple sccounts, etc. Of course cheaters should be
    removed from the site. But why should that have any affect on someone paying 60 bucks having to wait for your permission to have full accsee to the site? Of course it's a chess site, but THEY offer the forums also. Who are you to ...[text shortened]... ting in my moronic brain. Get down off your lofty perch dude, and. ah, startplaying more chess
    I think you have this forum confused with "THE NEW RULES" forum. This is "Site Suggestions".

    I'm going out on a limb here, but I'm guessing you are against this suggestion.

    P-
  11. 01 Jun '07 04:46
    Originally posted by smw6869
    I was replying to your original post. You said nothing about engine abuse, multiple sccounts, etc. Of course cheaters should be
    removed from the site. But why should that have any affect on someone paying 60 bucks having to wait for your permission to have full accsee to the site? Of course it's a chess site, but THEY offer the forums also. Who are you to ...[text shortened]... ting in my moronic brain. Get down off your lofty perch dude, and. ah, startplaying more chess
    Is it 60 bucks?
  12. 01 Jun '07 04:53
    I have been playing here well over four months and I have not completed 1000 moves yet. I don't think any new member should rush for their moves to post their opinion in the forums. A member is a member. There will always be abusers of some sort. This is inevitable no matter what.

    Briefly, I disagree.
  13. Standard member lordhighgus
    Kara Thrace &
    01 Jun '07 08:45
    Newbies should actually have to play some chess first, as it would stop the random spam-spewing dropkicks like 7ate9 and company from accessing RHP and blazing away with whatever is annoying their tiny little brains at the time.
    Yes is my vote, but ultimately it is a business decision, and we poor proletarian subs dont get a say in those areas.
    ......i must confess it is fun baiting my old kiwi mate though.
  14. 01 Jun '07 10:15
    Originally posted by adramforall
    ... members have made say 500, 750 or 1,000 moves.

    That will get rid of so much dross from the forums.

    The only forum newbies should have access to post in is the [b]help forum
    .

    Yes/No/alternatives?[/b]
    RAQs #6
  15. Standard member cadwah
    ¯\_(^.^)_/¯
    01 Jun '07 14:52
    Originally posted by GinoJ
    I have been playing here well over four months and I have not completed 1000 moves yet. I don't think any new member should rush for their moves to post their opinion in the forums. A member is a member. There will always be abusers of some sort. This is inevitable no matter what.

    Briefly, I disagree.
    A paying subscriber is less likely to spam the forums to the extent that 7ate9 and others do. I see no reason that any limitation would apply to subscribers. What this idea is trying to deal with is people who create new user accounts just to spam and abuse the forums. By making non-subscribers complete a set number of moves before having full forum priveledges you will make the forums a little less prone to abuse. It would however affect users who just want to use the forums, there are a few decent posters who don't play chess.