05 Mar 08
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundGiven thats its a game mod thats been implicated it was inevitable that the modding team would be disbanded.
How strong is the case against said Game mod ? Sound's like there's a big Arrow pointing at the dude saying "I'm a cheat", and as i know who it is, it is either unfair on the guy or unfair on all those he's playing right now (be it clan game, clan league game, or tournament).
As the levels of cheating are generally small compared to the games played as a whole, I think that admins have already decided its probably too much hassle to deal with and would rather just accept that it happens.
If you look at 3b players
In 2008 so far 44 accounts terminated only two were for 3b
In 2007 381 accounts terminated 35 for 3b.
There are over 10,500 players who have made 10 or more moves this month.
If even 100 were cheaters who could be removed you are still looking at less than 1%.
It does not make fiscal sense to waste resources tackling a problem that potentially affects less than 1% of your client base.
I think we will just need to accept that cheating will happen, does happen, and will continue to happen.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by adramforallFiscal sense is, most immediately, irrelevant, since the game mods were volunteers. In the broader sense, it may be QUITE cost effective in the long run to develop a reputation as a site that takes cheating seriously, since the individuals most likely to pay subscriber fees are those who consider themselves to be serious chess players; and even the dilettantes will become quickly fed up if it seems as though engine use is not being monitored.
Given thats its a game mod thats been implicated it was inevitable that the modding team would be disbanded.
As the levels of cheating are generally small compared to the games played as a whole, I think that admins have already decided its probably too much hassle to deal with and would rather just accept that it happens.
If you look at 3b players ...[text shortened]... we will just need to accept that cheating will happen, does happen, and will continue to happen.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundOur state's highest court has just prevented a new TV series (a fictional drama about local criminals) being shown here because the real trial is due to begin soon, and there is no way the guy will get an impartial fair jury, because in the fictional version he's shown as clever, cunning and guilty. While it's freely available on the internet, if you're interested enough, the judge also said that there are enough non-internet-users to create a jury pool, provided that the broader media maintains the silence.
Sound's like there's a big Arrow pointing at the dude saying "I'm a cheat
When I read the current discussion on whether x is a cheat, I'm reminded of an old saying "give a dog a bad name and hang him". The identity of x is readily available in these forums and x's reputation is in shreds, yet the "judge" seems content to let the discussion (or witch-hunt?) continue. For the sake of fairness alone, it's a pity.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsBut when your volunteers get implicated, you then need to sort something out yourself. That will inevitably involves some cost, and where the cost is disproportionate to the potential savings you just don't do it.
Fiscal sense is, most immediately, irrelevant, since the game mods were volunteers. In the broader sense, it may be QUITE cost effective in the long run to develop a reputation as a site that takes cheating seriously, since the individuals most likely to pay subscriber fees are those who consider themselves to be serious chess players; and even the dilettantes will become quickly fed up if it seems as though engine use is not being monitored.
Most chess sites have cheats. People will still go and play there, people will still pay to play there.
Generally speaking those that cheat will be amongst the higher rated players. If you look at the player tables there are just over 300 players rated 1900+
There are nearly 20,000 players who have moved on the site this month.
If you say 50% of the players rated over 1900 were cheating you are looking at 150 potential cheats.
150 cheats out of 20,000 players is 0.075%. Not worth admin getting involved.
05 Mar 08
1 edit
Originally posted by MissOleumWith the greatest respect. One of this site's best features was the Game mods. Now there are none, and i think it is right for paying customers to know why. Nobody has named the person here, so the dog can go about his buisness. But, if you ask me (which i'm sure you aren't), it would be better that the person accused got either cleared or banned quickly then we could draw a line under the situation. This is not on the cards while ther isn't a proper game moderation system.
Our state's highest court has just prevented a new TV series (a fictional drama about local criminals) being shown here because the real trial is due to begin soon, and there is no way the guy will get an impartial fair jury, because in the fictional version he's shown as clever, cunning and guilty. While it's freely available on the internet, if you're i e discussion (or witch-hunt?) continue. For the sake of fairness alone, it's a pity.
I'd much rather we had games mods than forum mods, this is a chess site after all, right ?
Oh, and Adram......The fiscal sense of having games mods is, people would leave the site if cheating goes unchecked, it's happening already.
just my humble opinion.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundI'm in total agreement, it's the ordeal by inaction that I'm unhappy about. X is entitled to a fair trial. Justice must be done and it must be seen to have been done. If the site-owners don't hold a trial they are leaving a guy (fairly or unfairly) exposed to cheating accusations. Yet if he's named in a forum we have to remove the post, otherwise he will have even less chance of a fair trial.
it would be better that the person accused got either cleared or banned quickly then we could draw a line under the situation. This is not on the cards while ther isn't a proper game moderation system.
I'd much rather we had games mods than forum mods, this is a chess site after all, right ?
I also agree that game moderators are far more necessary and important than forum moderators. If my chess literacy was anything other than pre-kindergarten level I'd have volunteered for that job.
05 Mar 08
I absolutely agree with the statement that banning is premature. Disbanding the mod team and failing to award the tourney title, along with the reps of the party(ies) leveling the accusations have lead to a presumption of guilt.
All I really want right now is some statement as to what's going on and when we can expect a resolution. I even understand that's not normal in these situations, but it's such a trusted member in such a big tourney that the puzzling actions and lack thereof by the site admins really need to be publicly explained.
Honestly, I really hope it's all some colossal misunderstanding. It seems unlikely, but everyone deserves their day in court. In the end, we should either see the tourney title awarded or the player banned. If there's some middle ground, then let's hear why.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by IchibanovI am in complete agreement. All that bothers me about this situation is "the puzzling actions and lack [of meaningful ones] by the site admins." The investigation began in private, which is where it should've stayed. The mysterious silence on the part of the site administrators after disbanding the game mod team however has forced this into the open, to the detriment of the accused's reputation and the integrity of the review process.
I absolutely agree with the statement that banning is premature. Disbanding the mod team and failing to award the tourney title, along with the reps of the party(ies) leveling the accusations have lead to a presumption of guilt.
All I really want right now is some statement as to what's going on and when we can expect a resolution. I even understand tha ...[text shortened]... ey title awarded or the player banned. If there's some middle ground, then let's hear why.
I haven't lost any faith in the game mod system as a result of all this; in fact I trust them even more because they had the fortitude to begin examining one of their own.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by misterrigelMisterrigel, you're dead on about keeping faith, not losing trust and recognizing the fortitude in motion. I'm a relative newcomer to the site
I am in complete agreement. All that bothers me about this situation is "the puzzling actions and lack [of meaningful ones] by the site admins." The investigation began in private, which is where it should've stayed. The mysterious silence on the part of the site administrators after disbanding the game mod team however has forced this into the open, ...[text shortened]... I trust them even more because they had the fortitude to begin examining one of their own.
but have seen and heard more than enough to have become fully convinced that the powers that be make every accomodation possible
to please the players and am persuaded that only an impatient purist or patently foolish person would presume to underestimate or criticize
Russ and Chris. They'll speak when they're good and ready and not until. Meanwhile, until anybody here has walked in their shoes with their
headaches for six or seven years... they are totally and categorically unqualified to shoot their mouth off. Let it go with a polite feedback.
-gb
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by caissad4Why would anyone cheat on an internet chess site?
Many of us here are familiar with the site Game Knot and its' refusal to deal with known computer cheats. My own rating there is 250 points below my OTB rating while here it is 150 points below my OTB.
Question #1: Do you feel that sites which engage in this behaviour are a detriment to chess ?
Question #2 : Would you feel that a site such as that is ...[text shortened]... computer cheats were allowed to continue cheating would you feel as if you were being cheated ?
What's the point??? That really baffles me.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundWould you really leave the site if the cheats were not banned?
Oh, and Adram......The fiscal sense of having games mods is, people would leave the site if cheating goes unchecked, it's happening already.
just my humble opinion.
I know I won't because those that cheat tend not to affect my personal gaming experience.
This will be true of most users on the site, that the cheats do not directly impact on them.
That may seem to be a bit of a "head in sand" attitude but thats life.
With the game mods being disbanded due to ambiguities with one member, it just goes to show that self policing does not work.
I feel sorry for these sad individuals that have such empty lives that they seek solace by pretending to be good at chess. Makes you wonder how the sad people with years of "engine chess" behind them felt when all their "good work" was destroyed with the stigma of USER BANNED.
There are many cheats still on the site, some are so glaringly obvious it beggars belief that they are still here - but they are.
Commonsense tells you that someone who plays at 1200/1400 level for a year or more then jumps to 1900+ in a few months, there is something dubious going on.
I don't have a solution, I don't think Russ and Chris have a solution, and I don't think the top genuine players on the site have a solution.
I don't think their will be a mass exodus as RHP is one of the better chess sites. Russ and Chris know this which will probably be why they are not really bothered about putting their views into these threads.
Just my opinion.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by adramforallBut it is if the rest of the good guys leave.
If you say 50% of the players rated over 1900 were cheating you are looking at 150 potential cheats.
150 cheats out of 20,000 players is 0.075%. Not worth admin getting involved.
Besides why have rules if they're not enforced?