OpenChess

OpenChess members,

The author of Arena GUI, Michael Diosi, is making some documentation on the unprofessional & unbecoming behaviors of the Sysops and Chessbase in relation to how customers/ PCC players are treated. Here's the CCC thread, if anyone's interested in furthering his documentation http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 61&t=37463

I for one would like to see current PCC / Chessbase customers take matters into their hands. Future customers have the luxury of being informed before-hand or before paying out their hard-earned money to an arrogant company/PCC-contract......only to be mistreated & harassed by childish sysops. At some point, current & sensible players with at least some self dignity have to realize this, after the extensive mistreatment and harassment in PCC, that they can make a difference and hit Chessbase where it hurts most: Chessbae' pocket account.

Prima wrote:OpenChess members,

The author of Arena GUI, Michael Diosi, is making some documentation on the unprofessional & unbecoming behaviors of the Sysops and Chessbase in relation to how customers/ PCC players are treated. Here's the CCC thread, if anyone's interested in furthering his documentation http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 61&t=37463

I for one would like to see current PCC / Chessbase customers take matters into their hands. Future customers have the luxury of being informed before-hand or before paying out their hard-earned money to an arrogant company/PCC-contract......only to be mistreated & harassed by childish sysops. At some point, current & sensible players with at least some self dignity have to realize this, after the extensive mistreatment and harassment in PCC, that they can make a difference and hit Chessbase where it hurts most: Chessbae' pocket account.

Apropos: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=911

BB+ wrote:

I checked the talkchess names against the sales records. Zero matches.

So if I trawl the 1997 TalkChess postings, I can provide a list of future blackmail victims... Obviously they acted in good faith, and were providing an invaluable service in talking up the product.

different altogether. there's no parallel to the necessary voluntary admission at dinner

Sean Evans wrote:

Chris Whittington wrote:To solve the problem, and I am not being flippant, close down talkchess and reduce the ability of end users to get to know each other on the other comp chess forums. Remove the chat facility, suppress email address distribution, prevent them organising into gangs, remove the silly one man one vote which evidently raises end users to the same forum level as the creatives. And stop sending free samples to the testing groups, some of those act as illegal copy distribution networks too.

ChrisW, that sounds a bit like fascism!

one man one vote is a fine idea when voting for government, but incredibly stupid for a forum that was set up as a place where producers and creatives would discuss issues relating to them and their industry. Allowing consumers to read is not normal with an industry forum, but I find that ok. Allowing consumers, or just any passing internet person, to write is extremely generous and consumers should see it as a privilege, but allowing voting rights to consumers which now swamp the producers is just plain crazy; it turns the forum into a consumers forum, which of course is what the shop wanted all along and ultimately a reason why the most producers and creatives now stay away. There's no reason at all to grant consumers rights on an industry forum.

Chris Whittington wrote: one man one vote is a fine idea when voting for government, but incredibly stupid for a forum that was set up as a place where producers and creatives would discuss issues relating to them and their industry. Allowing consumers to read is not normal with an industry forum, but I find that ok. Allowing consumers, or just any passing internet person, to write is extremely generous and consumers should see it as a privilege, but allowing voting rights to consumers which now swamp the producers is just plain crazy; it turns the forum into a consumers forum, which of course is what the shop wanted all along and ultimately a reason why the most producers and creatives now stay away. There's no reason at all to grant consumers rights on an industry forum.

I have to agree with you I suspect that a large number of the users they have now are not interested in anything from the shop or in paying for any engine they use.

Harvey Williamson wrote:

Chris Whittington wrote: one man one vote is a fine idea when voting for government, but incredibly stupid for a forum that was set up as a place where producers and creatives would discuss issues relating to them and their industry. Allowing consumers to read is not normal with an industry forum, but I find that ok. Allowing consumers, or just any passing internet person, to write is extremely generous and consumers should see it as a privilege, but allowing voting rights to consumers which now swamp the producers is just plain crazy; it turns the forum into a consumers forum, which of course is what the shop wanted all along and ultimately a reason why the most producers and creatives now stay away. There's no reason at all to grant consumers rights on an industry forum.

I have to agree with you I suspect that a large number of the users they have now are not interested in anything from the shop or in paying for any engine they use.

So the only "real hobbyists" are the ones who consume the commercial offerings? Come on, there's more to life than buying and selling, and as long as there are people willing to share their work for free, there will be a "market" for those products, too. Does that make it hard to convince users to part with their cash for a for-profit engine? Of course, but it's great incentive for the for-profit authors to provide something really extraordinary.

As for the whole industry v. dirty consumer argument... elitist much? I think that Zach started such an invitation-only producer's forum at some point but complained that it wasn't really getting used.

Is it annoying that people with absolutely no technical knowledge, neither of programming in general nor of chess engine programming specifically, get to run the show if they receive sufficient votes? Sure, that's annoying, but that's how that site works. There's still more technical discussion there than here, and we barely have moderators. Maybe we let too many dirty, non-paying, open-source-loving freeloaders in the door.

Or maybe I've misunderstood the gist of your argument.

Jeremy

Chris Whittington wrote:

Sean Evans wrote:

Chris Whittington wrote:To solve the problem, and I am not being flippant, close down talkchess and reduce the ability of end users to get to know each other on the other comp chess forums. Remove the chat facility, suppress email address distribution, prevent them organising into gangs, remove the silly one man one vote which evidently raises end users to the same forum level as the creatives. And stop sending free samples to the testing groups, some of those act as illegal copy distribution networks too.

ChrisW, that sounds a bit like fascism!

one man one vote is a fine idea when voting for government, but incredibly stupid for a forum that was set up as a place where producers and creatives would discuss issues relating to them and their industry. Allowing consumers to read is not normal with an industry forum, but I find that ok. Allowing consumers, or just any passing internet person, to write is extremely generous and consumers should see it as a privilege, but allowing voting rights to consumers which now swamp the producers is just plain crazy; it turns the forum into a consumers forum, which of course is what the shop wanted all along and ultimately a reason why the most producers and creatives now stay away. There's no reason at all to grant consumers rights on an industry forum.

I thought CCC was setup to protect Ed from the Pope !?

Prima wrote:OpenChess members,

The author of Arena GUI, Michael Diosi, is making some documentation on the unprofessional & unbecoming behaviors of the Sysops and Chessbase in relation to how customers/ PCC players are treated. Here's the CCC thread, if anyone's interested in furthering his documentation http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 61&t=37463

I for one would like to see current PCC / Chessbase customers take matters into their hands. Future customers have the luxury of being informed before-hand or before paying out their hard-earned money to an arrogant company/PCC-contract......only to be mistreated & harassed by childish sysops. At some point, current & sensible players with at least some self dignity have to realize this, after the extensive mistreatment and harassment in PCC, that they can make a difference and hit Chessbase where it hurts most: Chessbae' pocket account.

Well, looks like others have similar experience. Again, it's about character and professionalism. I personally stopped using PlayChess as of 2009.

So after the harassment, taunting, and teasing that continued for days, led by PlayChess sysops Holger (kibitzbot), Harvey, and Rob (The Referee), Holger taking the initiative, muted the account of a paying customer; again, because he criticized them on a public forum outside of PlayChess server.

Understand that you cant join/host a tournament once your rank has been demoted. Also even if your rank is not demoted, but the account muted, hosting a tournament becomes almost an impossible task. This user was the TD of tournament when Holger muted his account, and later banned not because any ChessBase/PlayChess policy was violated.

You can see another member telling the customer being insulted and harassed to be patient. Also note that it's unusual for SysOps to be present in tournaments, let alone three. The point must be stressed that this individual paid money to use the service.

Sean Evans wrote: I thought CCC was setup to protect Ed from the Pope !?

Sean

Nice one.

kingliveson wrote:

Prima wrote:OpenChess members,

The author of Arena GUI, Michael Diosi, is making some documentation on the unprofessional & unbecoming behaviors of the Sysops and Chessbase in relation to how customers/ PCC players are treated. Here's the CCC thread, if anyone's interested in furthering his documentation http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 61&t=37463

I for one would like to see current PCC / Chessbase customers take matters into their hands. Future customers have the luxury of being informed before-hand or before paying out their hard-earned money to an arrogant company/PCC-contract......only to be mistreated & harassed by childish sysops. At some point, current & sensible players with at least some self dignity have to realize this, after the extensive mistreatment and harassment in PCC, that they can make a difference and hit Chessbase where it hurts most: Chessbae' pocket account.

Well, looks like others have similar experience. Again, it's about character and professionalism. I personally stopped using PlayChess as of 2009.

So after the harassment, taunting, and teasing that continued for days, led by PlayChess sysops Holger (kibitzbot), Harvey, and Rob (The Referee), Holger taking the initiative, muted the account of a paying customer; again, because he criticized them on a public forum outside of PlayChess server.

Understand that you cant join/host a tournament once your rank has been demoted. Also even if your rank is not demoted, but the account muted, hosting a tournament becomes almost an impossible task. This user was the TD of tournament when Holger muted his account, and later banned not because any ChessBase/PlayChess policy was violated.

You can see another member telling the customer being insulted and harassed to be patient. Also note that it's unusual for Sysops to be present in tournaments, let alone three. The point must be stressed that this individual paid money to use the service.

I stopped playing PCC since 2008. It makes no sense to keep paying Chessbase just to be insulted at PCC. By the way, it's best to use an alias name even when paying. You've got to protect your personal information that could lead a potential hacker to your finances and other personal info. You never know who's on the other side of the network - especially when characters can't seem to put aside "personal touchy feelings" and be objective or able to differentiate between forum-discussions and the PCC server.

You know things are considerably worst at PCC when a Sysop is clearly at fault (as shown by the evidence you provided & personally witnessed similar events at PCC years ago) but the PCC customers end up having to take the insults and try to ignore these sysops because the PCC customers feel helpless and afraid to get muted/banned or don't know their rights - which includes payment cessation to Chessbase/PCC. Worst part of it is, customers don't get either a full refund or partial refund for the months not playing there PCC. Sad!

But, like I said before, I (or the public) can complain all we want. Until customers consciously and actively refuse to renew their memberships with Chessbase/PCC, this company will not learn...let alone these uneducated chimps called Sysops. For me, I left there and never looked back. But, I WILL NOT be insulted with my money. No sire/Madam!
About 2-3 weeks ago, 2 other people from Rybka forum got upset at this very behavior of the Sysops and decided to quit PCC/Chessbase. More power to such people.
Since the Sysops/certain Forum moderators like to read, quote, and save what one says in forums; they can save this to their bank. I really don't care.

Among other sites, I now play at Yahoo / Pogo; using the Chessbase/Fritz GUI (or sometimes Polyglot) + Winboard + YaY or STUCI (both ICS emulators are for Yahoo) and the same set-up but with YaYp for Pogo server. The methods used, compared to only using 1 GUI for PCC, obviously involves other adapters or auto232 in order to auto play at a server but at least it's free (Thanks to both the YaY & STUCI team) and most importantly, I can't be harassed, muted, nor banned from these sites. No Yahoo memberships fees required either. You got to like that.