@Molurus said in #29:
> It's not that I'm not interested in chat. I'm just not interested in kids spamming the chat, there's a difference. I'm very much interested in people talking about and analysing the games being played.
>
Game analysis during the game would not be permitted, analysis after the game is probably only of interest to you and your opponent, so the game spectator room would be a better place than the general arena chat for that.
> I'm pretty much convinced that filtering my own chat window (not a general filter for everyone, mind you) by rating would highly improve the quality of the chat that remains visible to me.
I'm not sure whether this rather arbitrary personal filter would be worth the dev time and server space to implement tbh, you can report kids spamming the chat and they will be timed out, and if it's too annoying just turn the chat off or enable Zen mode. Besides which, I can't see Lichess supporting something that discriminates against lower-rated players (or people speaking foreign languages for that matter, although I do agree that the chat works better if everyone sticks with the "official language" English)
> I really don't care if anyone finds that offensive, to be honest.
And hence the need for blogs like this...people not caring if they have discriminatory attitudes.
> In fact, in the old days the Internet Chess Club had something very similar: only show comments from titled players. And it worked really well.
That sounds like good old-fashioned chess snobbery to me. We would have some very quiet arenas if that were the case. One of the amazing features of Lichess is the opportunity to face titled players and the ability to communicate in the chat is part of that experience.
@Heart_of_Fire_Cat said in #24:
> This is just a good idea, but in practice, these rules don't apply to GMs or titled players, as far as I can see.
> I recently received inappropriate messages in a private chat from a GM for no reason, and that's it—no punishment at all.
The rules apply equally to titled and non-titled players. However, there is sometimes a misconception that no action has been taken after a report as the reporter is not notified of action taken (other than if the person they reported has been banned, and even this notification will not name the person reported). Not all moderator actions are visible and just because you didn't hear anything doesn't mean that a user hasn't been sanctioned in some way.
If you have reported someone for (eg) inappropriate messages and they continue after this, you should continue to report them.
@QueenRosieMary said in #33:
> The rules apply equally to titled and non-titled players. However, there is sometimes a misconception that no action has been taken after a report as the reporter is not notified of action taken (other than if the person they reported has been banned, and even this notification will not name the person reported). Not all moderator actions are visible and just because you didn't hear anything doesn't mean that a user hasn't been sanctioned in some way.
>
> If you have reported someone for (eg) inappropriate messages and they continue after this, you should continue to report them.
I guess you're right. But this GM in particular is known publicly to be rude and just react in nonsense manner after losing.
But let's hope Lichess team keep up good work :-)
@QueenRosieMary said in #31:
> Game analysis during the game would not be permitted, analysis after the game is probably only of interest to you and your opponent, so the game spectator room would be a better place than the general arena chat for that.
I meant chat during tournament broadcasts. I should have been more clear on that.
> And hence the need for blogs like this...people not caring if they have discriminatory attitudes.
When I'm trying to follow top level games, I'm truly not interested in comments by low rated players. They're just not helpful, informative or interesting in any way. You can call this 'discrimination', but it's justified discrimination. If you lack the education, you will not be hired at CERN. If you're not all that great at chess, you will have little success trying to sell chess lessons. That's just the way it is.
And I don't really mind answering questions low rated players have about a position. But in practice, they never ask anything.
@Cedur216
The issue of reports not being taken seriously occurs everywhere, especially when Lichess has subjective human mods and not objective robot mods.
The user you mentioned is not the only blatantly antisemitic (I have seen them post things that are quite clearly death threats) person here but unfortunately politics is one area where Lichess does not intervene much.
I suspect that the reason is because Lichess does not like being in politics, where people will accuse them of taking a side.
Of course, I don't think that it should be like this, especially since Lichess is so much better in its moderation of other things, such as harassment - and it really is something that has to change. I too have been harassed a lot on forums on this subject (hence why I just gave up) so I know what you mean.
I don't think complaining here will do much though. The majority of people here don't know what the user actually said and will only think you a harasser and a public shamer. Should we not be taking this issue to Lichess instead?
From my knowledge they have already deleted some messages of that user. So long as the offending messages are deleted, should we not be satisfied with just that? I don't believe you're wrong, and I support your view, but I don't think phrasing it this way is going to help.
@Molurus
In my experience, the kids here tend to be prodigies, so filtering it on rating isn't going to help much.
Titled players also almost never talk in tournament chat.
Why not just watch a stream if you can't bear watching normal Lichess chat? There's a lot of good titled players who will follow the broadcast and give commentary, and if not a lot usually at least one.
@greenteakitten said in #37:
> @Molurus
>
> In my experience, the kids here tend to be prodigies, so filtering it on rating isn't going to help much.
That's what I was thinking. I wonder if anyone has looked at chats in general to see if there is any correlation between rating and what is being posted. Do lower rated players, in fact, post more garbage? I really have no idea. I'm sure there is a strong age correlation but since age isn't known for most members, no way to really look at that (or filter for it).
I will admit that I have found some tournament chats to be so full of infantile chatter that I've skipped those events. I know I can turn off the chat but that is kind of like throwing out the baby with the bath water, as there usually is _something_ of value even if it is buried in dribble. I guess that is my problem to resolve though.
Thanks Lichess
@Cedur216 said in #26:
> the two of his posts I've read from August 12th, are still there
after some research I saw those were from another forum, anyways those should be removed