Oh God, give us all a break.

Apparently your interpretation of Freedom is the right to come barreling through a private place of business and insult as many people as you can, being rude and abrasive to the business owners and customers alike.

Read this loud and clear: This forum is NOT for sounding off on whatever CG related topic you happen to want to get off your chest.

Take this as a serious warning: If you make ONE more post on this page, no matter how trivial, which is NOT a genuine support-issue, you WILL go on probation, and that's a promise. I don't want to see your name on this forum even one more time.

This is always a touchy issue. We recently got an email from somebody who was furious that Hou Yifan was not present. They were a bit rude but I forgive them as I know how passionate people can be about these things.

First it's important to understand that there are two lists, the "short list" that everybody gets, the "longer list of players on the homepage" which you can activate with a preference option. There aren't many important people missing from the long list, but the short list has some very conspicuous absentees. So if it bothers you that somebody is missing, just activate your long list, and forget that a short-list even exists.

Next understand that we have an algorithm to determine who gets to be on the short-list and the long-list. There's no editorial staff that determines which player merits inclusion. It is not strictly based on rating, it also has to do with the number of games. So it's not easy to predict exactly who will be on the lists.

Third point: we do not give the women a bonus. If we just added a rule that said "add 100 points to all women for purposes of being on the list" then we'd suddenly have Kosteniuk and Hou Yifan and a number of popular women on the list along with the guys.

Such a rule seems to us sexist, as if saying that "women are weak and need a handicap to stand on par with the men." We don't believe that to be true.

And yet Yifan Hou's 2639, it might be enough to make her Women's World Champion, but it's a lower rating than (say) Zoltan Gyimesi or Igor Lysyj. Nobody sends us angry emails about THEIR omissions on the short-list.

Sometimes when somebody writes "so-and-so needs to be one the short list" I ask in return "OK, so who should we remove to make space for them?" I know, it's sort of a snarky answer, but it illustrates the dilemma: we can't just keep adding to the short list, or it will one day become longer than the long list!

Thanks, but a few comments:

• No correction slip was submitted. If the protocol was followed this might have been fixed ages ago. Complaining in the kibitzing areas is the worst way to get things done around here.

But indeed, you may expect my first contribution this week, with some 15 notable players, plus a few promising young talents. Later perhaps I can expand, as I have learned the ropes and have the quality upto <Annie K> standards, which is of course quite impossible.

Speaking of rationality, you wrote <as long as we don't have lunatics running around with thousands people on their ignore list>. Is it safe to conclude that those with very long ignore lists are already tending towards lunacy? And that those with empty ignore lists (eg, me, last time I checked) are maximally sane?

Sorry. Here's my real point. Some people - on various sides of various arguments, some nasty, almost all pointless and trivial - have taken to using this page as an outlet. You've made it quite clear that this is inappropriate.

In an ideal world, posts of that kind wouldn't get made at all. Yet we have to accept that they do. I suspect that the Kibitzers Cafe was originally intended as an outlet for such stuff, but it isn't working. Probably because the Kib Cafe seems to have degenerated into a kind of terminal idiocy (except at certain times, such as during the annual quiz). As a result, few people bother to read it regularly, I think. And these troublesome kibitzers want to be read, especially by admins.

Would it be possible to accommodate them by setting up a forum that admins are guaranteed to read? That would free this forum for its original user-friendly purpose.

Some of these people seem sufficiently deluded as to think admins will take their side in quarrels, see the righteousness of their cause, etc. It's not fair to you to have to continually point out that they're wrong.

*Some* sort of letting-off-steam forum just might work. With strict adherence to the usual guidelines, and no promise of admin arbitration, or the like. Just as a way of getting the more persistently deluded and quarrelsome types out of here, and into a nice padded cell.

Thanks.

<chessgames.com>: We are negotiating the next one right now. It will probably be an Akobian rematch unless that gets postponed to accommodate his schedule.>

Analysis of GM Akobian games at the recent Tradewise Chess Festival in Gibraltar you may find here

< For my part, I am done fooling around!!!!! There are <LAWS> in place to prevent stalking and cyber-stalking ... and I plan on using those to put a PERMANENT end to the crap from the trolls. (One way or the other.)>

or

<You misread me.

I want them to shut down the trolls (nothing else) ... and I would NEVER encourage tampering with a personal forum ... unless it got just plain nasty. (There have been a number of forums that have been censored over the years. Links to <nudity/porn> or really filthy language.)

Surely, you know I have this group of people. They follow me all over the site. ANYTIME I post ANYTHING, they try to bring an insult to bear.

But the fact that the complaint was not reported to the proper authority (the court or DAO) gives no cause for concern. At first glance, the ripoff site can be nothing more that what its name implies---a site that gathers and exhibits complaints so that adversely affected party will be enjoined to offer it compensation in exchange for its deletion- a rip-off!

But you are proposing to expel AJ because of his actions - i.e. following the civil procedure in the prosecution of a felony. But how else would you have imagined AJ to have done but by filing a complaint as he did?

The poster (allegedly AJ), was seeking redress for grievance for an alleged wrong done to him by fellow kibitzers. Unless it can be proven that the complaint does not amount to a probable cause but tainted with half truths and fabricated lies and/or laden with malice, it should be allowed to proceed and its resolution pursued and enabled.

This was already done. Water under the bridge.

I say let bygones be bygones. Let AJ be. He is the victim here and has committed no wrongdoing by making the report..forced to hung unto the lawful remedies made available to him. Why should be be faulted and sent unto forced exile?

If you trace back the history of this page, it will show you a track record of countless pleas and appeals AJ has made upon CG to address his plight. He had chosen to keep this an internal affair--due to his deference to his hosts..but then he can only hold for so many years...his grip gave off as his last ounce of energy left him .

In conclusion, not sure what to do, if anything at all.>>

Suggestion. :) I think this problem could be significantly alleviated by changing the location of the list preference setting option. If, instead of having to go all the way into one's permanent preferences to choose short list or long list, the choice could be made on the homepage itself - say, set the default to short list, with a toggle to load the long one instead, on a case-by-case basis - I think that would put an end to most list-related complaints altogether.

What I meant is that he has removed himself, by taking a site-related grievance to another 'authority'. To do so - with possible adverse effects on CG's business - and to keep using CG is not consistent with civilized or ethical standards of behaviour. In my opinion.

For the sake of brevity and also to avoid a quick descent into the abyss of arguing over members, I removed a number of messages. However their content is not irrelevant so let me summarize:

voratco posted <Look at what I have found> and showed a link to "BadBusinessBureau" aka "The Ripoff Report", a site where people can file public complaints about other businesses. This is the link:

http://www.badbusinessbureau.com/in...

On this page LMAJ complains bitterly about Chessgames and about stalking incident(s) that the claims took place.

Many users felt it necessary to scold AJ for this action, Pyke called him <deceptive and two-faced>, twinlark said <Say it ain't so>, Jim Bartle said <that badbusiness report is just too funny>, and DomDaniel went so far as to say <I don't see how he can remain>.

Then--of all people--our friend <matebay> voiced his opinion of the situation, in direct offense to my dictum to stay out of this support forum. As promised, we won't be hearing from him for a while.

Now, about AJ's "review" of Chessgames, here's how we really feel:

It is his right to voice his grievances on the Ripoff Report site. He seems to be making two separate charges: (1) An actual alleged stalking event that took place outside of Chessgames. (2) That Chessgames itself is "unfit", "allows links to porn", permits "homosexual jokes", and so forth.

The first charge is a serious allegation, and if presented with a subpoena we would cooperate with the police in any way they request.

I don't think i'll be posting *too* much given recent events, but i need an account in case, so i'm letting you know..

Hope you don't mind, but this way no-one can say i'm a "sockpuppet"..

I won't be posting in this forum after this (hopefully!), and i won't be coming here as regular...