29 Dec 11
Originally posted by tharkeshI do remember,.... although I had no input in those posts.... and there are many; me included intrested how things have transposed on page one, some have played these persons and some have not.
remember the time when a thread was opened about skeets getting above 2400 or so, at that time basically the top. these times are certainly over. she has resigned her games, apparantly because she was very unhappy about how an apparent engine user was taken care off (not). david tebb apparently stopped playing because of similar reasons. some other players ...[text shortened]... rue (sorry skeeter or david, if this was wrong)...
chess soap opera... would that sell on tv?
Just finished watching Coronation street with the Wife, this is better, believe me!!
29 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by tharkesh
remember the time when a thread was opened about skeets getting above 2400 or so, at that time basically the top. these times are certainly over. she has resigned her games, apparantly because she was very unhappy about how an apparent engine user was taken care off (not). david tebb apparently stopped playing because of similar reasons. some other players ...[text shortened]... rue (sorry skeeter or david, if this was wrong)...
chess soap opera... would that sell on tv?
29 Dec 11
Originally posted by atticus2in the willingness of the Site Admin (ie the owners) to implement the recommendations of the Mods
Before we go any further, Squelchbelch = Zygalski. And his match-up methodology, same as used by the Mods, has been widely debated, openly discussed, criticised, disputed, pulled to pieces and scoffed at - and still busts cheats convincingly.
As Zygalski says, the problem lies not in the technology, nor in the volunteer efforts of the Mods but - and this ...[text shortened]... up even the most blatant cheats. And they don't come more blatant than the top group on Page 1
You mean the unwillingness?
29 Dec 11
1 edit
Originally posted by atticus2thanks for clarifying, though this doesnt make the situation any nicer. i really hope this is not the start of the end - many people may not subscribe or stop subscription, if they feel engine users can hop along here, even if discovered...
Before we go any further, Squelchbelch = Zygalski. And his match-up methodology, same as used by the Mods, has been widely debated, openly discussed, criticised, disputed, pulled to pieces and scoffed at - and still busts cheats convincingly.
As Zygalski says, the problem lies not in the technology, nor in the volunteer efforts of the Mods but - and this ...[text shortened]... up even the most blatant cheats. And they don't come more blatant than the top group on Page 1
edit: oh, starting to collect my first 'dislikes'. i better shut up...
29 Dec 11
Originally posted by tharkeshIts because they are on your ignore list........don't sweat it.
thanks for clarifying, though this doesnt make the situation any nicer. i really hope this is not the start of the end - many people may not subscribe or stop subscription, if they feel engine users can hop along here, even if discovered...
edit: oh, starting to collect my first 'dislikes'. i better shut up...
30 Dec 11
Originally posted by usmc7257RHCheaters :'(
The owners of the site probably conducted an experiment. They concluded that it was fiscally more sound for them not to ban cheating. If they pay, they can play, or at least look at their advertisments (non-subs). Its a shame they sacrificed money for integrity.
P.S. Is it possible NOW to bring Ironman31 back? I'd like to learn Dutch defence. He played it every time against d4 or c4.
30 Dec 11
So does this mean that because I pay my subscription partly based on the premise that I am playing humans am I now due a refund ? If I wanted to play a computer I could have done so at home for free. Does the fact that the TOS suggests computer use is not allowed constitute false advertising ?
