Apology to Tmetzler

Originally posted by SirUlrich
So what engines do you use?

Originally posted by Phlabibit
Your title for this thread is lame, and the game mods are 100% sure... or IM would still be here.

Nothing else here you wrote is worth me saying anything more.

P-

I too have had some private communication with Tmetzler about this - I hope that he doesn't mind me revealing what was said. He has assurred me that RHP do not use spyware of any sort to look at what is going on on people's machines. He said that he had not been careful enough in his choice of words and gave the wrong impression in his PM to you. Any conclusions that were drawn were based on the moves those banned for cheating made in games. I was told that they spent a considerable amount of time making sure that IronMan31 was cheating before they acted. If for no other reason than they knew he was popular and knew that they'd get an immense amount of stick for it. btw. you should look at a few of Domenic0987's games - he was rated around 1000 before he started using an engine and after he did started finding breathtaking combinations.

The Terms of Service, which we have all implicitly agreed to, state, in section 13, that under certain cirumstances an account may be deleted without prior notification. Although they may not have realised this IronMan31, Yozzer et. al. agreed to what would happen to them if caught when they joined the site. Russ always informs us of any changes to the TOS and I seem to remember gave everyone a second chance by reminding us all of our side of the bargain a few months ago.

At first I was defending IronMan31 and Yozzer, but having thought about it I have changed sides. David Tebb's reputation is unimpeachable. He has always made considered points in his forum posts and I am convinced did not come to his conclusions lightly. IronMan31 may well be obsessively fascinated by chess, but this does not change the fact that the evidence overwhelmingly indicates that he cheated by using an engine. Being seen making moves without an engine present is proof of nothing, he could have done the analysis earlier and made game notes and used them, or just played opening moves at the times when he made moves in public.

Originally posted by no1marauder
http://www.timeforchess.com/vote/result.php?voteid=2

Originally posted by SirUlrich
So what engines do you use?

Originally posted by Vivaldi
THE MODS MAKE THINGS UP TO SUIT WHAT THEY WANT WHEN THEY WANT, THEY ARE PLANKS.
IRONMAN IS NOT A CHEAT, HE IS JUST BETTER THAN ALL THE REST ON RHP.
AS FOR THE TOS, ITS NOT WORTH A TOS AND SHOULD BE RE-NAMED THE SPY.

Originally posted by shavixmir
"Hi, my name is no1marauder. I'm a recovering humourolic. I used to laugh at lots of things and be really funny. But the TOS has saved my life. I was on a downward spiral to stand-up-comedianism, but the word of the TOSSERS has shown me the light. I have a relationship with the TOS now and we shall rejoice together in Chess heaven when we pass on."

...[text shortened]... "[/i]

Dear oh dear oh dear. I'm sure to end up in chess hell with Fischer and Ironman now...

Originally posted by Vivaldi
THE MODS MAKE THINGS UP TO SUIT WHAT THEY WANT WHEN THEY WANT, THEY ARE PLANKS.
IRONMAN IS NOT A CHEAT, HE IS JUST BETTER THAN ALL THE REST ON RHP.
AS FOR THE TOS, ITS NOT WORTH A TOS AND SHOULD BE RE-NAMED THE SPY.

Originally posted by Vivaldi
AS FOR THE TOS, ITS NOT WORTH A TOS AND SHOULD BE RE-NAMED THE SPY.

Originally posted by Moldy Crow
Yes , please elaborate .

Originally posted by DeepThought
I too have had some private communication with Tmetzler about this - I hope that he doesn't mind me revealing what was said. He has assurred me that RHP do not use spyware of any sort to look at what is going on on people's machines. He said that he had not been careful enough in his choice of words and gave the wrong impression in his PM to you.

Originally posted by Bowmann
Then it may be helpful to know what his careful choice of words would have been to substitute for:

'...there were other tools that actually let us "watch" him actively cheat.'

Originally posted by Vivaldi
E-L-A-B-O-R-A-T-E ABOUT WHAT

Originally posted by Bowmann
Then it may be helpful to know what his careful choice of words would have been to substitute for:

'...there were other tools that actually let us "watch" him actively cheat.'

Originally posted by Ragnorak
Its quite obvious how they were able to 'watch him actively cheating', but given the disgrace that is the current analyse board, then, again it boils down to assumption and not science.

D