Originally posted by KraniumRuss asked for volunteers and then set up a community vote. Hundreds of the most active users voiced their preferences. Your one man crusade against the Game Mod concept, approved by 90% of those who voted, is getting tiresome. When you own your own chess site then you can make the rules, but Russ does here. He wants the Game Mods, so do 90% of the people here, other chess sites have similar systems in place and we're going to get them, so deal with it.
In addition to the concerns I listed in The “Cheat Police” is a bad & dangerous idea ... the actual vote itself was severely flawed:
People nominated themselves
They were not required to provide any form of identification
(they have remained anonymous throughout)
The were not required to provide verifiable outside (USCF, FIDE, etc.) titles or ratings
...[text shortened]... t required to provide a chess resume, or list their 'cheating' experience or skills in any way
Originally posted by flexmoreyour logic is flawed....
the vote in iraq will be fundamentally flawed,
the votes in the u.s. have been fundamentally flawed,
of course the cheat police vote will be too.
life is fundamentally flawed.
flaws are life.
live with it.
Originally posted by Nyxie with flawed spellingproving to have had a high fide rating means $#!+.
..... Why should they have to provide "indenification, ratings, blah blah"? There is no reason I can think of that requires I know thier name adress uscf rating etc.