Originally posted by cotoiTrue. Doesn't change the fact that the law is often an ass and abiding by the law can cause difficulties of this sort.
Checking PMs should obviously be done when serious offences like this one happen. I mean, PM's are private up to a limit, you cannot use PM's for hate language or illegal activities like drugs.
It's possible, I suppose, that Admin has concluded no violation of the TOS has occurred. The 'nym' GM Norblackheart violates nothing. And while no one seriously disputes this guy has claimed to be GM Kjetil Lie, that in itself is only impersonation if anyone is stupid enough to believe it. At least, this is how I assume Admin might see it.
If so, Admin is missing a fairly big point. What's at stake is the credibility of this playing environment. We know the place is awash with engine-users - every time one lot are scythed down, another horde surge over the horizon. At least Admin and the Mods do their rational best to keep things in check. But if the site also becomes infested with charlatans, blaggers and frauds too, matters fall apart.
I'm not proposing any changes to the careful moderation process, nor to the TOS. But I do think there is a place for community action - that is, where we, the playing community, believe someone is 'guilty' beyond reasonable doubt of violating the terms by which we play together in here. Admin should heed that concern.
In the case in question, I have instigated what might be called a Citizen's Arrest. I've informed Admin in advance of publishing details of my action. A player has been named and faced with incriminating evidence; that player has apparently done a runner. We, the playing community, think the right thing has been done in naming and shaming. Surely Admin must believe that too. So why not act?
Well, in one of the messages from GM Nor. to me, he is stating his identity is the Norwegian GM with ELO 2530. This message is recorded in the message log. The incident was reported (I created a fair play ticket) by me to RHP. I have not received any feedback from the site. Furthermore, I have never ever received any feedback or comments from the site on similair complaints on other players. To me it seems that as long as a player is paying his annual fee he is an asset for RHP. I do agree with Atticus 2 that the community should speek up. But RHP should also do everything possible to get the message out and not "hide behind fair-play tickets".
Originally posted by nolavikingSo there must be on of two options:
Well, in one of the messages from GM Nor. to me, he is stating his identity is the Norwegian GM with ELO 2530. This message is recorded in the message log. The incident was reported (I created a fair play ticket) by me to RHP. I have not received any feedback from the site. Furthermore, I have never ever received any feedback or comments from the site ...[text shortened]... ld also do everything possible to get the message out and not "hide behind fair-play tickets".
1. RHP checked indeed that the player in question is indeed who claims he is and therefore Andrew Martin is a liar.
2. RHP doesn't give a shiiit on fair play tickets. Most likely they are not even read.
I guess that the third question about engine assistance was ruled out by the game mods here, right?
I wonder if he used an engine to generate his unreal win/loss record.
If so, I wonder how statistically apparent is the engine use, and if the data is strong enough as evidence for a ban (and thus proving impersonation is not needed).
While impersonation may be a way to support a direct ban, that fact may also support that he was attempting to disguise engine use by claiming to be a GM, and that fact combined with statistical evicence could be enough to prove engine use, and to support a ban.
Moreover, it is ok to me if the ban happens in a few months, especially if he is not playing. Years seems kind of long, but I think its seems prudent not to ban people immediately or in an matter of days in most cases, but to take the time to allow for additional feedback and analysis and to make sure the ban is the appropriate action.
Originally posted by cotoiIt wouldn't matter if the game mods ruled engine use out or in. On this site they can only recommend a ban, not enact it themselves. I think that's how it works around these parts. Presumably admin have reasons to ban or not in this instance and I can't find anything that will enable us mere mortals to force their hand.
So there must be on of two options:
1. RHP checked indeed that the player in question is indeed who claims he is and therefore Andrew Martin is a liar.
2. RHP doesn't give a shiiit on fair play tickets. Most likely they are not even read.
I guess that the third question about engine assistance was ruled out by the game mods here, right?
- Joined
- 16 Feb 07
- Moves
- 27653
Originally posted by nolavikingI quite agree with this. Russ has said several times that he doesn't like the public character assassination that periodically goes on here with players, in particular those suspected to be engines. Indeed, I sometimes tire of it too, especially the clumsy accusations with poor basis (this isn't one of those, though). One of the attempts to deal with this was the fair play system and a mod-enforced ban on public accusations.
... I do agree with Atticus 2 that the community should speek up. But RHP should also do everything possible to get the message out and not "hide behind fair-play tickets".
The trouble is, the system doesn't work very well. In particular
1) Its slow
2) Its very opaque. Why some players are banned and others aren't is totally mysterious
3) No response on these tickets is ever received.
It would be nice, for example, if a note about why a particular player has been exonerated was sent out, at least to the person submitting the "Fair Play ticket". I can understand not wanting to say why folks have been banned (if nothing else, there are potential legal consequences to public disparagement), but, for example, explaining an exoneration might help clear things up a little. Or just saying "We're working on it" in some cases.
This is my suggestion. RHP should be very clear and communicate to all members what is allowed and not allowed on this site. Rules & policies should be included in a consensus form accepted by all members. Of course this will not stop cheaters but it is important to create a "policy platform". The advantage with correspondence chess, comparing to OTB chess, is that it is allowed to study chess openings and games during the play. To abuse this and let a computer program like Fritz suggest the actual moves does not make sence. It should not be about winning a game or a tournament, it should all be about how to learn more about chess. I love to play on this site, but I prefer to play a person and not a machine 🙂
Finally, Thank you Atticus2 for taking action.
Originally posted by nolavikinghttp://www.playtheimmortalgame.com/myhome/termsofservice.php
This is my suggestion. RHP should be very clear and communicate to all members what is allowed and not allowed on this site. Rules & policies should be included in a consensus form accepted by all members. Of course this will not stop cheaters but it is important to create a "policy platform". The advantage with correspondence chess, comparing to OTB ...[text shortened]... prefer to play a person and not a machine 🙂
Finally, Thank you Atticus2 for taking action.
As I recall I had to accept these terms of service when I joined. So the policy is there, it seems we are just a little short on the enforcement. There may well be reasons for that I suppose.
Originally posted by DiophantusHave you ever heard Andrew talk through his last cricket match?
It wouldn't matter if the game mods ruled engine use out or in. On this site they can only recommend a ban, not enact it themselves. I think that's how it works around these parts. Presumably admin have reasons to ban or not in this instance and I can't find anything that will enable us mere mortals to force their hand.
More seriously a fair play ticket is asking the site to note a concern, not to be a judge and jury i- a dispute.
Originally posted by HabeascorpDepends on which Andrew you are talking about. My cousin Andrew doesn't play cricket so I am guessing it's not him. Could be my cricket mad uncle Andrew, although he is bit ancient to be actively playing now. I am told groundsmen frown upon the use of Zimmer frames and such like on the hallowed turf.
Have you ever heard Andrew talk through his last cricket match?
More seriously a fair play ticket is asking the site to note a concern, not to be a judge and jury i- a dispute.