Current Rating System needs a change

@V1g1yy said in #50:

No, I don't think I did. The quote in your post is not something I could have changed and you had already quoted me before you started typing. That would have come from the page YOU had on your screen as the page was open. I have no control over changing that after you're reading it.

Nice try, but no.

But even if you/we were to interchange fun and enjoy, since you more or less consider them the same, my point remains.

And I edited the reply to add additional paragraphs and correct a typo, which is about all I ever do without (edit) in there to show a material change was made, to avoid discussions like this. Be that if it may, go ahead and say it did say "fun", it changes nothing else I said, not even the gist of the sentence you claim I edited.

Mala fides indeed.

I didn't quote your whole statement, I deleted the first paragraph because I didn't need to reply to it.

I honestly don't know why you are taking this line in the conversation, as the deleted portion wasn't controversial and would be something a significant portion of the chess population would have agreed with.

Regardless, if you are going to be acting in bad faith then I don't feel obligated to continue discussing any topic with you.

Have a good day.

@pet59 said in #49:

sorry is 'feel intimitated' understandable?
forcing? Not giving all the information which enables them to make a decision which suits them(what they have done!).

I understand more than you can imagine. But we are asked to be polite and I only had some English ad school some 50 years ago. Others explain better than me, but you don't understand them either.
I do.

So, you are saying people have the 'right' to be afraid and so nothing should be done to prevent someone from exercising their 'right' to be intimidated.

Ergo, taking an action or creating an atmosphere that promotes calmness would be disagreeable for you, as then that would interfere with someone's 'right' to feel uncomfortable?

And, you are saying that you are only being polite because you were asked to - implying that you don't wish to be polite?

What have I done that would incite you to feel it necessary to not be polite?

My apologies if I seem rude - just feeling a little under the gun between you and that other guy accusing me of misquoting him [which I didn't do].

@DeimosRuhk said in #51:

Mala fides indeed.

I didn't quote your whole statement, I deleted the first paragraph because I didn't need to reply to it.

I honestly don't know why you are taking this line in the conversation, as the deleted portion wasn't controversial and would be something a significant portion of the chess population would have agreed with.

Regardless, if you are going to be acting in bad faith then I don't feel obligated to continue discussing any topic with you.

Have a good day.
Mala fides?

Do you mean like the part where you clearly said I referred to 1700 when I never said any such thing? Is that like this sentence you claim I removed or altered ex post facto? I said this, Unedited and precisely what you quoted above and your reply below it:

@V1g1yy said in #39:

So the questions here are, why are you trying to pair these players?
And what do you think will happen with the players in your above example where one of them doesn't have a one in 10 chance of winning a game. I say they will very quickly decide chess is not for them because they will be made painfully aware of their inability to beat this person 400 points higher, in spite of supposedly being considered in the same group. I also say that very quickly the rating Gap will increase strictly due to the tilt of the weaker player having been curb stomped so much that they no longer are psychologically capable of being the 600 player they really are. Your very paring idea may well have at least temporarily turned them into a 450 or 500. What do you say to that?

And to that you replied with this: How did you convert what I said into this?
@DeimosRuhk said in #41:

Oh, you are talking about a 1700 player being paired with a 800 player. So you are responding to the idea that I would hop into one of those Beginner Player Pools and curb stomp everyone? Disregarding the idea as meritless or flawed for that reason alone?

Yes, one of us acts in bad faith, and one of us can actually go back and quote the other as to where. I will not edit any other post, I will make a new post with a correction if need be, (making the discussion very hard to read, but whatever. You needn't worry about me altering what I wrote).

@DeimosRuhk said in #26:

That is a logical fallacy - there is no way anyone could know that would have been the outcome.

Yeah sure - you claim your "GF" was too "intimidated" to play against you due to a theoretical difference in playing strength (aka a 600 vs 1600 rating), but one cannot extrapolate her willingness to play against you after the practical proof of said difference? Oh, the rating system did you a good one there, old chap.

@Rally_Vincent said in #54:

Yeah sure - you claim your "GF" was too "intimidated" to play against you due to a theoretical difference in playing strength (aka a 600 vs 1600 rating), but one cannot extrapolate her willingness to play against you after the practical proof of said difference? Oh, the rating system did you a good one there, old chap.
How about that. We are talking about 200 points past the level where she had a 1 in 109 chance of winning the game. And we have to listen to this guy pretend that he didn't know why there would be an issue with this. She dumped him because he insulted her intelligence more than he insults ours.

It's entirely true I may have been born at night, but it wasn't last night.

About 8 hours ago, this discussion struck an iceberg and began sinking. As I understand it, the discussion will never rise again, no matter how many contributions are made here. As I write this, there are already 13 topics above this one in the discussion list.
On the horizon, there seems to be a light of a nearby ship, but I fear that it is not coming to help.
They say that some people continued to play cards while the life boats were filling. I like to think that, at some point, I would have left the game, gone out, and jumped over the rail. Maybe, I would have been the one to hit the propellor on the way down.

summer slump

@ytroitsky said in #19:

That said, ELO does have some problems.

Yes I heard about that too. https://pitchfork.com/news/jeff-lynnes-elo-cancel-final-concert-due-to-illness/

On god, some games I play, when me and the other guy are the same rating, and I win, I get 5 elo, but the next round when I lose, the guy gets like 9 points, and we are both the same rating. Like, what the skibidi man?