- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
Originally posted by Fat LadyHow about automatic bans for any coward who makes accusations of cheating without being specific or providing evidence?
For anyone called "Ronald".
I think this would improve the quality of the forums enormously and cut down the number of cheats by a significant amount as well.
Richard
26 Sep 12
Originally posted by Shallow BlueWhat are you talking about? There's a whole thread in the chess forum (somewhere) which has data galore concerning 'Ronald' and his chess prowess?!
How about automatic bans for any coward who makes accusations of cheating without being specific or providing evidence?
Richard
26 Sep 12
Originally posted by Fat LadyJust to make a point:
For anyone called "Ronald".
I think this would improve the quality of the forums enormously and cut down the number of cheats by a significant amount as well.
I throwwothclocks (Ronald) is not a cheat and shouldn't be banned.
His posting in forums seems to be negligeable also.
And of course I have an idea about the person you are aiming at, but this is not a good way to do it.
Alas, it's the only way.
The first thing which struck me when Ronald Stagg started posting and it became clear that his real playing ability was light years behind the way he performs in games on this site was that his first name was the same as the notorious Weyerfritz. The latter stayed on the site for years after it was clear to everyone that he was a cheat. Mr Stagg is more noticeable because of his activity on the forums, so hopefully he'll be booted a little sooner.
27 Sep 12
Originally posted by Fat LadyThe admins don't care evidently, and that's a shame.
Alas, it's the only way.
The first thing which struck me when Ronald Stagg started posting and it became clear that his real playing ability was light years behind the way he performs in games on this site was that his first name was the same as the notorious Weyerfritz. The latter stayed on the site for years after it was clear to everyone that he was a ...[text shortened]... oticeable because of his activity on the forums, so hopefully he'll be booted a little sooner.
27 Sep 12
The post that was quoted here has been removed'Widely regarded' eh...
Have a look at any 'slow to fill' tourney...there is 'usually' a reason other than mere time frame. Also, another scenario, a tourney is 'filling up nicely \ steadily' and then a certain player enters...over the next few hours you'll find the 'field' dwindling at an alarming rate...naturally it makes you wonder why 😉
27 Sep 12
Originally posted by Fat LadyI see Ron Stagg has just beaten kingshill. I might have to run that one though the box tomorrow. 🙂
Alas, it's the only way.
The first thing which struck me when Ronald Stagg started posting and it became clear that his real playing ability was light years behind the way he performs in games on this site was that his first name was the same as the notorious Weyerfritz. The latter stayed on the site for years after it was clear to everyone that he was a ...[text shortened]... oticeable because of his activity on the forums, so hopefully he'll be booted a little sooner.
Originally posted by Proper KnobNot much point really, we all know what the results will be. I believe kingshill's real life grade is lower than that of the now banned seadevil. Both perfectly good club-level players, but a level or two below the like of David Tebb and Northern Lad. Stagg seems to be a below average club player from what I've seen of his OTB games and the comments he makes in the chess forum.
I see Ron Stagg has just beaten kingshill. I might have to run that one though the box tomorrow. 🙂
There seems to be a campaign of giving all of Stagg's posts the thumbs down, even the perfectly innocuous ones. This seems like an excellent idea to me, it would be the online equivalent of symbolically turning our backs to him!