Unacceptable irresponsible and negligent to lock serious feedback topic without a relevant response

5 chess games, or something. Where you receive no punishment for playing 3 moves and resigning.

Just a verifiable email account.

Ah, so it was in a PM - and not a copy & paste of the content but describing what it was? That does seem like an overenthusiastic application of the offensive word filter to me. If it was up to me, I'd exclude the moderator accounts from those word filters so that people could send that stuff to them, but I doubt if Chess.com will ever invest any effort into that sort of change. Probably best to just send them a link to the offensive post.

So it was just the words and not the pictures? There's definitely some situations where the autofilter ignores the original post but not the post quoting the original post, which is definitely lame - I suspect it's something like the autofilter not applying to posts made from the mobile apps. I agree that's dumb, but it's just a matter of not assuming that the text in something you quote is okay to quote - I stand by the statement that's just amplifying the original content.

I think that's a great suggestion, but as to how "easy and efficient" it would be to make that sort of change? Chess.com has shown no inclination to implement such things for as long as I've been around, so either it's not either of those things - entirely possible because the crappiness of their previous platform is how they justified V3, which was supposed to be better - or it's just not the sort of thing they're interested in. Maybe both - Chess.com has always had this very open posting policy that allows anyone to post whatever they want as soon as they join and the autofilter is a flawed patch they've stuck on afterwards. Maybe if the autofilter was smarter using AI or something, but again, the site is mostly about chess rather than social media, and it'd be the Facebooks or Blueskys of the world that would find it more worthwhile to invest in that sort of thing.

That dates back to my time as a mod - the idea was to involve people who were on a lot to help point out dodgy posts that the mods in that club could then act on. Probably died because the mods were already actioning the obvious stuff and were finding it hard to action the subtler stuff.

Got tired of people sh*canning the site with passive-aggressive BS and decided I didn't have to be polite about calling it out any more.

fair enough. but let's not paint over the whole community with the troll brush.

is this not where one might blame the site?

lol - as if Chess.com requests and makes those sort of recommendations. I'm pretty sure what I said was that if it was me making the decisions, I would have banned you as someone who never says anything positive about the site and only ever adopts the worst opinions of its owners, employees and volunteers who are generally trying to help out. I thought you were being overly harsh on those folks and I tried really hard to present what I thought were perfectly reasonable alternative points of view and possible explanations but you absolutely refused to recognise a single iota of any of that and continued to bad mouth the whole place. Which is you are clearly still doing, despite the fact that Chess.com continues to let you use their services as a basic member.

Articulated in your usually aggressive and highly critical way, no doubt. They've obviously long since decided to just ignore you, which I can't say I disagree with. There are things Chess.com can and should improve and I do agree that they have shown little inclination to implement stuff that sounds like it would be easy that would make a difference, some of it technical, some of it policy-wise, and I found - and still find - that so frustrating as well, and it's why I stepped down from moderating, but that's different to attributing malicious motives and attitudes to the whole organization.

I didn't think I was, but the offenders often want to declare themselves as representative of the whole community as well. The vast majority of Chess.com members probably never read the forums, let alone post in them.

...that's fine & dandy, give cc had messaged that to every member they had done it.... to avoid unnecessary ridiculous warnings.

You have to tell me how you included two quotes in the same post. Please?

Yes, but I do think there's a difference between being critical of them and just chucking out insults. I suppose if one has gotten frustrated enough at the lack of action on some of this that it's not unreasonable to becomes snippy and snarky about it - I can certainly see that's happened in the way I respond to certain posters and types of posts. Might have to think about that.

How did you do break that quote into two parts and get your responses out of the text-box?

@David, Under what circumstances did you loose your moderator status?

well this time it was fast. ibox appeared and disappeared in a minute.

You just need to quote the post, add some of your own text, and then you can copy the quote+text and paste it on a new line, and then you can edit the bits that have been quoted.

You need to add a bit of "normal" text because if you just copy & paste the quoted text, that formatting seems to take over your whole post, and your replies look like they're part of the original quote (which they obviously are not)

I'm gonna try it