Harassment and Toxic Behavior on Chess.com

[JustinHorton]

However, there has to be a border between innocent banter and offensive language, and not everyone will agree on where it is.

Agreed but I think common sense plays a big part here. Even innocent banter can offend some people so it makes sense to reserve it for occasions when, perhaps just being in the company of close friends, you can be sure it won't be taken amiss. I've failed to observe this rule myself (usually in face-to-face situations rather than online) on more than one occasion and discovered that what I believed to be a harmless joke was taken in a completely different spirit.

While this is true, it's also true that a fair amount of the sort of online conduct we're discussing here isn't intended to be either harmless or a joke.

[Phil Neatherway]

I wonder if there would be less abuse if people had to register with their real names, like we do on this forum.

[JustinHorton]

That's one approach, but there are some fairly obvious drawbacks to making people use their real names, includinf making them more vulnerable to abuse and harrassment off-site.

[Kevin Thurlow]

Even if there are moderators, it is not unknown for them to be biased. And as you can frequently be anonymous online, the problem gets worse. I used to post on a "Countdown" site occasionally, which was mainly populated by people who had done well on the programme. In theory, people used real names, so there wasn't too much abuse. Then one day, a member of the forum posted some messages from a secret part of the forum, which had been set up for an inner circle of forumites. This guy had guessed someone's password and got access to the secret forum. It included 4-letter abuse of other individuals, even from former winners of a series of Countdown! This sort of makes you despair. The ringleader was a Cambridge Graduate who was looking for a job. I hope the possible employers saw the site!

Probably many individuals here experienced or witnessed bullying at school (and I'm sure some here were the school bully), but at least that usually stopped when you went home. (Obviously, it didn't for some.) But that was perhaps easier to deal with, as you knew who was doing it. One guy at school attempted to chloroform me in the playground, but a timely elbow in the face discouraged him. He was outraged, but his friends dragged him away saying he deserved it.

Bullies will be encouraged by anonymity, so the internet is wonderful for them. Having said that, there was considerably more bullying in the workplace just before I retired than when I started work. I think this is because the work market is tough and if you complain, you get sacked. Employment laws are really no help.

So-called minorities are an easy target of course - but I suspect the bullies just change their abuse depending on the target. Obviously, targets thought to be "weak" will be more frequent targets.

[NickFaulks]

Can we not just unambiguously condemn the behaviour of the individuals who perpetrate this vile nonsense?

Yes.

Yes indeed, Carl, and I think that everyone has. The point is that you must know better than anyone else here that it is the really egregious cases that are easiest to deal with.

I once punted the Latvian Gambit and my opponent asked whether I would like to take 2...f5 back as a mouseslip. I was mildly amused, but I am sure there is a community which would consider that offensive. Fair enough, but I wonder why they would wish to avail themselves of the chat option at all.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"That's one approach, but there are some fairly obvious drawbacks to making people use their real names, includinf making them more vulnerable to abuse and harrassment off-site."

True - another Countdown expert was enraged by a review of an online book he wrote, and travelled about 300 miles to break a bottle of wine over the critic's head...

Don't worry, I'm sure Ray won't do that.

[Adam Raoof]

I once punted the Latvian Gambit and my opponent asked whether I would like to take 2...f5 back as a mouseslip. I was mildly amused, but I am sure there is a community which would consider that offensive.

The Latvian Welfare Fund perhaps?

http://www.72qt.co.uk/

[Matt Mackenzie]

However, there has to be a border between innocent banter and offensive language, and not everyone will agree on where it is.

Agreed but I think common sense plays a big part here. Even innocent banter can offend some people so it makes sense to reserve it for occasions when, perhaps just being in the company of close friends, you can be sure it won't be taken amiss. I've failed to observe this rule myself (usually in face-to-face situations rather than online) on more than one occasion and discovered that what I believed to be a harmless joke was taken in a completely different spirit.

Perhaps a classic recent example of this was Carlsen's original tweet when learning of Kramnik's retirement.

[Roger de Coverly]

The point is that you must know better than anyone else here that it is the really egregious cases that are easiest to deal with.

That reminds me of a well known ex-blogger and chess writer based in the Medway area, whose written contributions in his blog and twitter feed could be border line offensive. Anyway it appears he is now an ex-twitter user as all his tweets have been removed. I think before the end he'd lost a bit of interest in chess, this forum and the ECF.

[David Sedgwick]

That reminds me of a well known ex-blogger and chess writer based in the Medway area, whose written contributions in his blog and twitter feed could be border line offensive. Anyway it appears he is now an ex-twitter user as all his tweets have been removed. I think before the end he'd lost a bit of interest in chess, this forum and the ECF.

I saw the man to whom you refer last Friday. I can assure you that he is still interested in chess.

[J T Melsom]

His posts were offensive but he seemed less keen when the tables were turned on him. May even be a decent chap away from social media, but came across very poorly on it.

[Leonard Barden]

The man to whom you refer is an excellent and efficient Treasurer, Librarian, Archivist and press officer for the British Chess Problem Society, who sends out material about the popular Winton British Solving Championship of which I and other major columnists make grateful use.

[J T Melsom]

That's good to hear. It doesn't in anyway contradict my previous post and may even confirm its key thrust. Mr Giddins played the forum 'game' for a while and then when it got too much, made some ill advised and poorly researched comments about a fellow player which went beyond what many of us considered acceptable. It may have been a generational thing as is so often the case but there it is.

[Christopher Kreuzer]

Why are we not mentioning his name? Steve Giddins. He also edited British Chess Magazine for a while. His posts and blogs didn't come anywhere near the sort of thing being discussed in this thread. I wasn't aware he had deleted his Twitter account.

[J T Melsom]

Its somewhat invidious to discuss levels of offensiveness or to claim to be offended on somebody elses behalf, but the line was crossed by some distance. Nobody is accusing Mr Giddins of the sort of stuff raised at the start of the thread, but the thread itself has moved on.