|
Apr 2021
9:38pm, 28 Apr 2021
9,950 posts
|
jda
I like 960 when playing my uncle to avoid repeating the same game for the 5000th time....but it doesn't seem so necessary with varied opponents 
|
|
Apr 2021
9:39pm, 28 Apr 2021
34,060 posts
|
SPR
I'd quite happily avoid having to do any opening prep!
|
|
Apr 2021
8:03am, 29 Apr 2021
25,990 posts
|
fetcheveryone
A few folks were asking about JogWalker - I spoke to him recently, and he said: "I replied to the original email on the day that I was banned but have not yet had a reply."
|
|
Apr 2021
8:06am, 29 Apr 2021
14,108 posts
|
JK *chameleon*
That's disappointing to hear. Doesn't fill me with confidence about their process.
|
|
Apr 2021
8:21am, 29 Apr 2021
11,917 posts
|
chunkywizard
It looks like they have bots to work out cheaters hence you might get high numbers but then you need humans for the appeals which could take a while because I doubt they have a lot of staff on this.
|
|
Apr 2021
12:07pm, 29 Apr 2021
14,109 posts
|
JK *chameleon*
It's rather a shame they go so unilateral on it. Its kind of a reverse of how Facebook deals with its Community "Standards" where nothing ever seems to get banned, no matter how objectionable!
|
|
Apr 2021
12:15pm, 29 Apr 2021
73,951 posts
|
Gobi
JK - I can confirm facebook bans people I know a few who have served periods
|
|
Apr 2021
12:25pm, 29 Apr 2021
2,064 posts
|
mole-thing
I’m not confident about algorithms at all. A few years ago I had a credit card that I’d stopped using. Some website decided that they had authority to auto renew my membership and charged me £12. I didn’t find out until it was well overdue and they phoned me. This damaged my credit rating.
At the time my main credit card was with Sainsbury’s Bank. I also had a savings account with them with a long standing positive balance over twice my credit card limit. Needless to say the Sainsbury's Bank algorithms decided I was now a poor risk and without warning restricted and then closed my account.
I no longer shop at Sainsbury's and am now very cautious about using credit cards on line. Beware of algorithms. They are out to get us.
|
|
Apr 2021
1:52pm, 29 Apr 2021
38,548 posts
|
HappyG(rrr)
Mole-thing - quick advice, specifically on credit records. You can rectify them!
Where there is a reason that something has been unpaid - any kind of dispute, reasonable accident (like your canceled card) etc. you can get a correction on your credit record.
All companies then access the same two or three providers for this credit record and they even share the info between themselves usually, so that you will be then a better credit worthy customer.
It's not hard and it's usually free of charge. Worth doing.
Other causes of incorrect credit record:
Council getting your address wrong (sometimes even slightly) on the electoral roll
Sharing a house or address, even temporarily, with someone else links your credit records (you can request to get them separated again)
Any incorrect or disputed debt - goes on your record by default, doesn't always automatically get removed when resolved.
Request a copy of your record - it's fascinating (and worrying!) G
|
|
Apr 2021
1:55pm, 29 Apr 2021
34,061 posts
|
SPR
I did a Google search and there's talk of them just restating to a lot of people that they cheated and they will get a second chance (on a new account) if they admit it. What I read made me wonder how much effort they put into reviews although of course a lot will have cheated, very few admit they've doped in sport even in the face of positive tests. I did find one case where a ban was overturned where they provided evidence of ranking forgot to look at the time frame though.
I've also read aspersions being cast on the GM reviews as in there may be conflicts of interest.
I think an algorithm is fair enough but review process should properly review.
There's an actual section of chess.com dedicated to discussing cheating but you have to join it and not sure I want to go down that rabbit hole.
|
