Only Chess
05 Feb 11
15 Feb 11
Originally posted by DiophantusAs I told several times, the admins of this site make too much money from subscriptions. They simply don't need any new ones, I imagine that they are busy all day counting the huge amounts of cash from the current paying members.
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.
15 Feb 11
Originally posted by cotoiQuick back of an envelope calculation based on the number of players listed in the player tables and assuming approximately 50% are subscribers suggests about £200 000 per annum. I have ignored revenue from advertising as that is usually a minor component of website income and will be even less here where the ads are less intrusive and not foisted upon subscribers "by accident". The 50% subscribers figure seems reasonable after a quick scan through the player tables.
As I told several times, the admins of this site make too much money from subscriptions. They simply don't need any new ones, I imagine that they are busy all day counting the huge amounts of cash from the current paying members.
£200 000 is not a huge sum when you take into account paying more than one person plus all the costs associated with running a website. Still a comfortable living no doubt although not quite "huge amounts of cash".
16 Feb 11
ATM he has three games wating to be skulled.
Game 7852567 Game 8149744 Game 8149743
All players take skulls so they will most likely pick them up next time
they log on.
If I was one of the lucky ones with a game left I would hang on
to be last to slick click his skull.
What a miserable wretched existence. Watching with salivating gums at
some completes strangers grade plummet.
Surely I could do something better with my time.
(I'm at work just now, so this better than working).
16 Feb 11
Originally posted by roma45How many players on the first page? 30 apparently. According to some that is a lower bound to the number of cheats on this site. Another theory is that anyone higher rated than oneself is a cheat, so using me as an example there are currently 408 cheats. I reckon somewhere between 30 and 400 then.
obviously without naming names how many cheats do you think are playing here? i think about 8.
Why do you ask though? This thread isn't about cheating. The guy in question is in trouble for allegedly impersonating a completely unknown Norwegian GM. As far as I can determine the only person who has ever heard of the GM in question is my cricket mad uncle Andrew. Probably something to do with his time in the Foreign Office and dubious shenanigans on Spitzbergen during the 1950s.
- Joined
- 26 May 02
- Moves
- 72546
16 Feb 11
Originally posted by cotoiI don't think money is the issue.
As I told several times, the admins of this site make too much money from subscriptions. They simply don't need any new ones, I imagine that they are busy all day counting the huge amounts of cash from the current paying members.
The site admin hate any kind of controversy.
Banning a typical player for cheating = controversy.
Banning a top rated player for cheating = more controversy.
Banning a player who claims to be a GM = extreme controversy.
16 Feb 11
Originally posted by Diophantusif you read the 1st post carefully, i think atticus was asking the accused how his games where near perfect i.e engine user so its safe to say after his cover was blown he vanished. i think this is about cheating not pretending to be some unknown gm
How many players on the first page? 30 apparently. According to some that is a lower bound to the number of cheats on this site. Another theory is that anyone higher rated than oneself is a cheat, so using me as an example there are currently 408 cheats. I reckon somewhere between 30 and 400 then.
Why do you ask though? This thread isn't about cheating ...[text shortened]... do with his time in the Foreign Office and dubious shenanigans on Spitzbergen during the 1950s.
16 Feb 11
Originally posted by roma45I don't think so. If anyone was accusing anyone of cheating then this thread would have been removed and likely those doing the accusing would now be suffering a forum ban. I think you will find it is exactly what it appears to be, Atticus provided evidence that GM Nogginthenog is (or has been) impersonating a Norwegian GM. Impersonating another person is not cheating but it is against the TOS.
if you read the 1st post carefully, i think atticus was asking the accused how his games where near perfect i.e engine user so its safe to say after his cover was blown he vanished. i think this is about cheating not pretending to be some unknown gm
16 Feb 11
Originally posted by Diophantuspoint taken, i was reading too much between the lines. makes you wonder why he bothered pretnding to be him though?
I don't think so. If anyone was accusing anyone of cheating then this thread would have been removed and likely those doing the accusing would now be suffering a forum ban. I think you will find it is exactly what it appears to be, Atticus provided evidence that GM Nogginthenog is (or has been) impersonating a Norwegian GM. Impersonating another person is not cheating but it is against the TOS.
16 Feb 11
Originally posted by David TebbI think there's a point of diminishing controversy; I can't imagine that any present banning would cause the furor that IM31's did. Most users of the site are now aware that there are engine users here and that they are subject to ban.
I don't think money is the issue.
The site admin hate any kind of controversy.
Banning a typical player for cheating = controversy.
Banning a top rated player for cheating = more controversy.
Banning a player who claims to be a GM = extreme controversy.
Personally, "extreme controversy" is mother's milk to me.