02 Mar 08
Originally posted by Pawn QweenI agree with all of that.
If people have cheated in tournaments, then it affects every other player in that tournament. I would have thought the vast majority of site users would vote for cheats to be banned.
I don't want to play blitz games and don't have the opportunity to play a range of others OTB. But if I wanted to play a computer, I wouldn't have joined this site. I am s ...[text shortened]... me way and that's why this thread exists.
Did you read the thread that this one replaced?
I just had the temerity to question how relevant the issue of engine use is when
a) 80% of us are below 1500 & will rarely encounter an engine
b) How exactly do we take collective action if there is no longer game moderation?
c) I have no proof but I would imagine the vast majority of users never visit the forums (or at least it seems to me the same couple of hundred people do all the posting) so they won't even be touched by the debate we're having.
Hit 'em where it hurts is the first thing that springs to mind. A mass petition to withdraw subscriptions at xxxx date for instance.
I doubt the effectiveness of this, because of point c) & also I've noticed during my 35 years that those who shout loudest (e.g Arrakis) are ironically those least likely to take such bold action!
02 Mar 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Mephisto2well I probably care too much about my rating, despite of continuous effort to not care. but a more important reason for me is that I really hate losing. against a strong human there always is a chance, some hope of survival, but against an engine there really isn't any. at my level, that is. and I find that extremely frustrating.
Despite knowing that a lot of negative feelings will be triggered, I want to put my 2 cts anyway, so how about this: this is a correspondence chess site, why not accept the facts of life (just like the ICCF does) and not forbid engine use at all? I don't use engines, but I don't (well, 'didn't' is more precise, since I don't play rated games anymore) mind o win (or lose) many points by playing against players of a different skill category.
another thing that I hate about computer play is that a computer doesn't plan. it's not really thinking anything, it has no plans, and as such there's no point in trying to understand its play. because there's nothing to understand, it's just crunching numbers on and on and on. an open file +0.13 pawns, winning a pawn +1.0 pawns, doubling a pawn +0.21, a controlled square +0.03 pawns etc. -I can't find any satisfaction in that.
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by Varenka... because I don't play many games anymore at all (only tutoring if any, and that would be setup games), and I have since long lost any interest in the rating systems of online chess sites. Nothing replaces OTB chess in that respect (which I also have abandoned for personal reasons).
>> So why don't you play rated games anymore?
No site can garantee that no engines are used in email based (correspondence type) chess. You can detect obvious engine users (at a huge time investment cost), but not more.
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by gambit05True - they could, but I guess that's the benefit of having a decent number of Yes marked games to trigger the 'suspect' rating. Plus it would mean an investigation - not an immediate guilty verdict. It may end up being counter productive for engine users to falsely feedback Yes 9/10 ratings as it would invariable ensure analysis of games involving their own engine played moves too.
Sounds like a great idea. However, the engine users might mess it up, by randomly and frequently accusing others.
What I'm trying to get at is that a system like this could be easily maintained, provide a lot of interrogateable data and ensure players feel like they are contributing in an effective manner.
- Joined
- 07 Jun 05
- Moves
- 5301
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by crazycolI *really* like this idea. I think it could take a lot of work to set it up properly, and analyse the results, but I might be up for it.
What I'm trying to get at is that a system like this could be easily maintained, provide a lot of interrogateable data and ensure players feel like they are contributing in an effective manner.
I have posted feedback to that effect.
- Joined
- 07 Jun 05
- Moves
- 5301
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by SquelchbelchHiya
If people are that bothered they should try to improve their online blitz play or concentrate on OTB.
One of my reasons for playing correspondence chess is to improve my opening knowledge through playing. I also try on occasion to visualise the board from the FEN - as an exercise.
Here it is clearly permitted to use opening books, and databases. On blitz sites it is generally not permitted. I might get strange looks if I take out a book in an OTB tournament ;-) And as for blindfold chess, I am a long way from good enough for that.
So why I care about cheats:
Rating is a way to measure if I am progressing, but also to get games against people of the same level. A Master will stomp on me without thinking, and I will do the same to someone rated 1200. It does not help me at all if someone messes up the opening, but then plays like a grandmaster (with electronic assistance). They might end up at the same rating as me, but the style of play is just painful. A better player ought to come out of the opening with an advantage, and then capitalise.
02 Mar 08
The voting idea backed up with some sort of automated system of at least determining correlation with engine moves sounds like a good start for a mod-less system. Still, at some point a judgment call will need to be made and that still needs to come from a human. And that human should really be a very strong and trusted player, leading us back to the main problem. Still, it's better.
As far as motivating the site admins, I agree with squelch that, practically, most players don't read the forums. But I also agree with Arrakis that we can't just sit around and do nothing about it.
What about a petition from clan leaders and top 100 players demanding action on the current 'situation' with a threat to mass-boycott? I don't know if enough of those people would actually be up for such drastic action, but it could be worth a try. If we got enough key people serious enough about the issue to threaten withdraw from the site, I think that would elevate the issue significantly.
Having such key members post 'I agree' in response to a properly worded thread-posting would get the point across. The wording (and the canvassing for that matter) would have to carefully avoid actually naming names, but I think it'd be doable.
Such a petition could be organized via personal messages to the key members by any motivated member or group thereof. Unless...would messaging many members in that way be skirting a 3(c)?
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by IchibanovThe trouble with this is that a large number of the top 100 are allegedly a large part of the problem.
What about a petition from clan leaders and top 100 players demanding action on the current 'situation' with a threat to mass-boycott? I don't know if enough of those people would actually be up for such drastic action, but it could be worth a try. If we got enough key people serious enough about the issue to threaten withdraw from the site, I think that would elevate the issue significantly.
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by KeplerI was just discussing this and I thought the same, it is probably more common at the very high levels of play than the lower rated players and is therefore going to be difficult to spot I would think.
The trouble with this is that a large number of the top 100 are allegedly a large part of the problem.
I dont think there is anything that can be done to stop it for good,I guess its just one of those things that unfortunately you have to accept the chances of playing someone that cheats sometimes, makes me kind of happier that I am not a high rated player, I would be nervous if I was a brilliant player incase people thought I was cheating, its a tough subject, its a shame there isnt anything that can be done to rule it out for good.
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by Pigface1I can think of a way to make engine use very difficult but it would be difficult to implement. As part of my work i invigilate online exams. The client software will not run if anything other than the OS and other approved applications (anti virus etc) is running. While running, the client software shuts out all access to other software of any kind. If this site had specific client software then the same restrictions could be applied to users and their PCs. I suspect this is how Playchess works. I can't play on Playchess because i use a Mac but I have been told that if anything other than the client software is used the player's rating is reset. Of course one could still fire up an engine on another PC but that does make it a lot less easy and might even put potential cheats off.
I was just discussing this and I thought the same, it is probably more common at the very high levels of play than the lower rated players and is therefore going to be difficult to spot I would think.
I dont think there is anything that can be done to stop it for good,I guess its just one of those things that unfortunately you have to accept the chances ...[text shortened]... , its a tough subject, its a shame there isnt anything that can be done to rule it out for good.
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by KeplerThey could run the engine, while not on RHP and vice versa.
I can think of a way to make engine use very difficult but it would be difficult to implement. As part of my work i invigilate online exams. The client software will not run if anything other than the OS and other approved applications (anti virus etc) is running. While running, the client software shuts out all access to other software of any kind. If this s ...[text shortened]... e on another PC but that does make it a lot less easy and might even put potential cheats off.
02 Mar 08
I had thought about the problem with the top 100. Still, I would hope that most are not cheaters and would come out in support. If nothing else, it might be a good way to gauge the feeling of the membership. If we tried this and got a tepid response, at least we'd have tried. As long as it doesn't violate anything in the TOS, there's nothing to lose really.
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by David TebbI agree with you that the main problem is who will perform the investigation.
That seems like a great idea!
The main problem that I see with it is who will do the "thorough investigation"?
The site owners have abolished the Game Mods, who were the only people to do any investigating.
It all comes down to whether they are serious about stopping engine use. At the moment, it doesn't look like they are.
Another serious issue, at least at the moment, is the lack of correct game history. This is making investigations much more complicated, and possibly even impossible...
02 Mar 08
Originally posted by cludiAre investigations still ongoing despite the disbanding of the game mods?
I agree with you that the main problem is who will perform the investigation.
Another serious issue, at least at the moment, is the lack of correct game history. This is making investigations much more complicated, and possibly even impossible...