Anātman recruiting

Anātman Clan 25454 is recruiting players of all weltanschauung; please come and join us ☸️♟️.

Our standard game load is 6-8 concurrent games.

Note: games are typically arranged against slightly higher rated players. Playing good games against good opponents and improving is valued higher than winning challenges.

A

@anitya said
Anātman Clan 25454 is recruiting players of all weltanschauung; please come and join us ☸️♟️.

Our standard game load is 6-8 concurrent games.

Note: games are typically arranged against slightly higher rated players. Playing good games against good opponents and improving is valued higher than winning challenges.

A

At a quick glance you have at least 6 players who would be considered higher rated.

I do like your way of looking at it though as improving. We do sometime learn from our loses. Other times we repeat and do the same bad habits. So long as one is actually learning and not overwhelmed I think it is a great idea, sincerely.

-VR

lol who thumbs down a recruiting post in a clan forum. I mean really. What kind of person is on a chess site (chess player), in a clan forum (interested in the clan feature) , reads a thread that simple says - this clan is recruiting new players, and thinks yeah - that's no good - I need to anonymously tell everyone here that I don't like that post.

It begs the question - what posts would they like. When they go to a chess site and look in the forum that talks about the team or clan feature - what kind of post would they approve of if not a recruiting one?

I love this chess site and this is one of the reasons why. Every day I get a chance to smile.

A

@anitya said
lol who thumbs down a recruiting post in a clan forum. I mean really. What kind of person is on a chess site (chess player), in a clan forum (interested in the clan feature) , reads a thread that simple says - this clan is recruiting new players, and thinks yeah - that's no good - I need to anonymously tell everyone here that I don't like that post.

It begs the question - ...[text shortened]...
I love this chess site and this is one of the reasons why. Every day I get a chance to smile.

A

Your post is spot on. I know one person that I did not use to get along with, and now I consider him a friend but I don't bother him to often as he is really busy. He has a stalker. If he invented a cure to Cancer he would get a thumbs down. So some do it for no reason other then there is something wrong with them.

The other possible reason to your question is that it is possible the two people do not like the person who posted for their own personal reasons, and the way they express it is by doing a thumbs down. Not the way it was intended to be used.

I'll do a thumbs up but I don't use the thumbs down. And in the last seven or eight years, I did one alert. But I am also hardly ever in the forum at all. The longer you stay out, the more you most likely will keep smiling. lol 🙂

I know another person in here that no matter what he posts he gets a thumbs down, this is in addition to the other person I spoke of. I also have my own personal stalker. I know who it is but I won't say it without proof.

I haven't posted on here since coming back to this site, but I've always thought it would be interesting to take away the anonymity from the thumbs up/down feature 😉

@dukeloveday said
I haven't posted on here since coming back to this site, but I've always thought it would be interesting to take away the anonymity from the thumbs up/down feature 😉

You are not alone in that. For me, it doesn't matter either way. But a lot of people now feel the same way you do. They just talked about this topic a week ago. They want to see who put a thumbs down every time they post.

@dukeloveday said
I haven't posted on here since coming back to this site, but I've always thought it would be interesting to take away the anonymity from the thumbs up/down feature 😉

Back some time ago we had a vote on this issue and most of people who voted was against showing the Subscriber who had thumbed down the post. Odds are pretty good they would then have to confront the Subscriber who posted. I believe it was an overwhelming vote on not to show the Subscriber. I voted to show the Subscriber/poster who thumbed down the post, but what the majority want rules. Perhaps feelings on this has changed? I don't really know. Is it time for another vote on it?

-VR