Only Chess
24 Dec 07
03 Jan 08
Ok, if it is a bug then it will depend on users reporting it when they happen. Could be an event that is very rare and most users who do encounter it wouldn't bother chasing it up (maybe they think they have offered a draw when they didn't).
In this situation, seems like you can't prove that you didn't click on it or that the admins interfered with your game (very unlikely, because out of all the games, why would they choose yours to force a draw?).
The only people who can prove it is a bug are the developers of the site. Which cannot be resolved unless other players report it a number of times and the source of the bug is identified unfortunately.
Starting a thread about it wouldn't help you, as everyone would just see that a draw has been offered and accepted. You would just have to wait to see if it happens to other users and the bug gets fixed.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by gaychessplayerNo. It's up to someone that makes a claim to support it, a so-called negative proof.
Since moderators view every thread, I'm surprised that they haven't made a comment about this situation in this thread. Does their silence perhaps validate vietasianfox45's claim?
03 Jan 08
Problem: Unexpected game outcome.
Causes thus far postulated: (1) User error; (2) software error; (3) wanton intervention by rogue administrator(s).
Number of ideas testable by readers of this thread: zero.
Possible solutions:
(1) Unlimited public complaints. (Probability of success -- approaching zero, as demonstrated by this thread.)
(2) Unlimited public speculation involving untestable ideas. (Probability of success -- zero.)
(3) Private feedback to site administrators.
Guess which course of action I favor?
Please stop perpetuating this thread. Thanks in advance to those willing to cooperate with this suggestion.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by gaychessplayerOops....I seem to have responded to a thread on the wrong thread...Sorry about that....
I think it was Larry Evans who once wrote that the only thing you learn by beating patzers is how to beat patzers.
When you lose to stronger players, you gradually learn how to beat stronger players.
03 Jan 08
2 edits
Originally posted by FabianFnasHowever, there has yet to be a second case posted here. That does not permit the bug theory to be dismissed, but it does not tend to confirm it, either. As for lying mods, how can that be proven or disproven here? It cannot. (And one is always free to regard the *abstract idea* as credible or not.) So, again, we are back to the three options I gave. The matter has been given sufficient airing for the time being, absent further developments.
I think the bug theory should be taken seriously. If there is only one more case, then it is quite probable.
Theory of lying mods should be dismissed completely.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsI give you another case. Look at the Game 4150650. Me as white and KnightStalker47 as black.
However, there has yet to be a second case posted here. That does not permit the bug theory to be dismissed, but it does not tend to confirm it, either. As for lying mods, how can that be proven or disproven here? It cannot. (And one is always free to regard the *abstract idea* as credible or not.) So, again, we are back to the three options I gave. The matter has been given sufficient airing for the time being, absent further developments.
I am a beta-tester of the "conditional move" concept. It has not been launched yet but if you know what the opponent will move, you can make a conditional move like "If he moves this, I move that". This can be made in several steps.
In the last move I checked him with my queen. He had two alternatives, in either case I take his queen. Not too later I will win the game. I wouldn't never offer him a draw when the win is in my hand.
Not even if I wanted to, I could. Why? I made a series of conditional moves. Actually all of the moves 30 Rg8+ Kf5 31. Qh5+ Ke4 and finally 32 Qf3+ was made by conditional moves with no intervention from me. So when the Qf3+ was made, I wasn't even near my computer.
(One possible continuation might be: 32 ... Kd4 33. Qxc6 Rxb4 34. Rg4+ etc... but this is not the point.)
Now I have revealed the game, my intention with it. The game is not longer in progress, but if the mods reinstate the game the gentleman KnightStalker47 has said that he will immediately resign the game. RHP is really a friendly place, isn't it?
Now, this is not a draw position, not at all, white cannot lose if he doesn't make nay foolish misstakes. So for all what it matters, it is a 'proof' of something that generated a draw offer that KnightStalker47 immediately accepted.
If you want me to do it, I can post the game once more, with the time tags attached too. Is it neccessary?
This is the second known case. Is there others? These two incidents happened no tlong from eachother in time. Perhaps it is a programming error that turned up after a revision somewhere?
So, now, I believe vietasianfox45 for being innocent of offering a draw. He wasn't. However, i don't think the mods were involved in deciding it was a draw. The mods has all the honour, and it is very wrongful and contra-productive to call them names.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasLooks like I overlooked a fourth idea:
I give you another case. Look at the Game 4150650. Me as white and KnightStalker47 as black.
I am a beta-tester of the "conditional move" concept. It has not been launched yet but if you know what the opponent will move, you can make a conditional move like "If he moves this, I move that". This can be made in several steps.
In the last move I ...[text shortened]... as all the honour, and it is very wrongful and contra-productive to call them names.
Solution #4 (a meta-solution): Post a message (as I did) providing a logical argument for ending the thread, thus provoking a contrarian response consisting of additional information which *conditionally* demonstrates the existence of a software bug.
I take full credit for resolving the problem, even though this was inadvertent. 🙂 Note, however, those asterisks: it is still possible for further new information to disprove FF's proof. Meanwhile, it looks convincing to me, as these things go.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsPerhaps I post the timetags too, just in case...
Looks like I overlooked a fourth idea:
Solution #4 (a meta-solution): Post a message (as I did) providing a logical argument for ending the thread, thus provoking a contrarian response consisting of additional information which *conditionally* demonstrates the existence of a software bug.
I take full credit for resolving the problem, even though th ...[text shortened]... information to disprove FF's proof. Meanwhile, it looks convincing to me, as these things go.
25. Qc4d3 {02 January 2008 17:34} Qb6c6 {02 January 2008 17:37}
26. Qd3xh7 {02 January 2008 18:12} Rg8b8 {02 January 2008 18:13}
27. Qh7h4 {02 January 2008 18:14} Ke7f8 {02 January 2008 18:19}
28. Rd4d8 {02 January 2008 21:38} Rb8xd8 {02 January 2008 21:40}
29. Rd1xd8 {03 January 2008 05:29} Kf8g7 {03 January 2008 15:30}
30. Qh4h8 {03 January 2008 15:32} Kg7g6 {03 January 2008 15:33}
31. Rd8g8 {03 January 2008 16:38} Kg6f5 {03 January 2008 16:43}
32. Qh8h5 {03 January 2008 16:48} Kf5e4 {03 January 2008 16:50}
33. Qh5f3 {03 January 2008 16:56} 1/2-1/2
The conditional moves aren't executed immediately. It has a delay of some 5 minutes.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by FabianFnasPlease keep us posted (if appropriate) on any response from the site administrators on this. (I assume you've sent feedback.)
Perhaps I post the timetags too, just in case...
25. Qc4d3 {02 January 2008 17:34} Qb6c6 {02 January 2008 17:37}
26. Qd3xh7 {02 January 2008 18:12} Rg8b8 {02 January 2008 18:13}
27. Qh7h4 {02 January 2008 18:14} Ke7f8 {02 January 2008 18:19}
28. Rd4d8 {02 January 2008 21:38} Rb8xd8 {02 January 2008 21:40}
29. Rd1xd8 {03 January 2008 05:29} Kf8g ...[text shortened]... 1/2-1/2
The conditional moves aren't executed immediately. It has a delay of some 5 minutes.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by Mark AdkinsYes, the Game Moderators knwos it, I've sent friendly feedbacks. I know that they will do whatever possible to find out what's happened. Now when they have two cases I'm sure that they will find something.
Please keep us posted (if appropriate) on any response from the site administrators on this. (I assume you've sent feedback.)
I'll keep you posted.
03 Jan 08
Originally posted by vietasianfox45Admin/Mods don't force draws/losses. Stupid people/mistakes cause them
LOL Actually, I bet you don't care if the admins and mods give you draws and losses in games that you should have won then!! Or have losses where you should have drawn them. So, I am guessing you don't mind or care if they would give you all losses in every game you play, regardless of the outcome!!
When I lose or draw, this is only through fault of my own - I accept it, try to learn from it and move on