18 Jun 08
Originally posted by no1marauderYes, but RHP isn't a democracy. Russ is the final decision, and he almost gave up. This is better than the alternative and I think it worth waiting and seeing where it goes.
http://www.timeforchess.com/vote/result.php?voteid=2
The community has constantly supported the Game Mod concept.
Todays news may have been, "RHP has decided to end game moderation all together. Other sites do not check, as they feel it is impossible to find people are cheating. We gave it a good try, but game moderation is a fruitless endeavor".
P-
18 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by PhlabibitI think he's saying essentially that anyway when hardly anyone gets banned for six months even though his Game Mod team had identified blatant and obvious cheats in the meantime.
Yes, but RHP isn't a democracy. Russ is the final decision, and he almost gave up. This is better than the alternative and I think it worth waiting and seeing where it goes.
Todays news may have been, "RHP has decided to end game moderation all together. Other sites do not check, as they feel it is impossible to find people are cheating. We gave it a good try, but game moderation is a fruitless endeavor".
P-
No, it's not a democracy, it's a business which should be responsive to what its customers (who also happen to be their product in this case) desire.
18 Jun 08
Originally posted by no1marauderI don't agree with you, No1.
I think he's saying essentially that anyway when hardly anyone gets banned for six months even though his Game Mod team had identified blatant and obvious cheats in the meantime.
No, it's not a democracy, it's a business which should be responsive to what its customers (who also happen to be their product in this case) desire.
Russ' dissatisfaction with the game moderation concept as it currently appears is clear, and so I think that instead of binning the whole idea, he has spent time considering the alternatives - and as such is staying true to the concept of game moderation that is so important to many of us here and the subject of such huge debate in the forums.
However, I will say this. With all the negativity aimed at Russ regarding the apparent inaction of the NIGM, did anybody actually stop to think that whether the current system of asking current players and volunteers of the site to be the "game police" was a good idea? Now, I have never met, not played any of the current game mod team, and as such I have no idea whether they are who they say they are. There is an inbuilt irony in that we are putting our trust into a group of strong players we have never met to be in charge of banning other strong players that we also haven't met.
It was only a matter of time before the game mod team would have to hunt one of their own, and there lies the impossibility of it all. How can we trust any future game mod team to not be cheaters in their own right? Perhaps, we should wait to hear what Russ has in store for the New And Further Improved Game Moderation (NAFIGM?). Surely, finding a solution to the problem IS being responsive to the desires of it's customers.
18 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by HindsteinWhat a surprise; every post you've made on this issue for the last six months has been "Let's just see what Russ is going to do!" Unsurprisingly the answer has invariably been "Nothing of consequence".
I don't agree with you, No1.
Russ' dissatisfaction with the game moderation concept as it currently appears is clear, and so I think that instead of binning the whole idea, he has spent time considering the alternatives - and as such is staying true to the concept of game moderation that is so important to many of us here and the subject of such huge de y, finding a solution to the problem IS being responsive to the desires of it's customers.
18 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderIn this case, he has posted that there will be details of a new system within a week. Is that not good enough for you?
What a surprise; every post you've made on this issue for the last six months has been "Let's just see what Russ is going to do!" Unsurprisingly the answer has invariably been "Nothing of consequence".
Perhaps instead of constantly posting about the last 6 months of relative inaction, you should be looking to the future and celebrating the fact that something is being done about it.
18 Jun 08
Originally posted by HindsteinI've heard that song before.
In this case, he has posted that there will be details of a new system within a week. Is that not good enough for you?
Perhaps instead of constantly posting about the last 6 months of relative inaction, you should be looking to the future and celebrating the fact that something is being done about it.
18 Jun 08
Originally posted by HindsteinThere was already a system that did that. The problem seems to be that the Site Admins stopped doing their job and acting on the recommendations of the Game Mods. Why would I expect the same Site Admins who blocked the enforcement of bannings against those found to be cheaters by the Game Mods to do better on their own esp. when they are not very competent in chess?
Maybe you have, but is this not what you want? - a new system that finally tackles the engine use problem.
18 Jun 08
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderYou don't need to be competent at chess to see that once the game moderation team was tarnished by accusations of one of it's own, the system became flawed. Even with a new set of volunteers there is no way to guarantee that the same won't happen again.
There was already a system that did that. The problem seems to be that the Site Admins stopped doing their job and acting on the recommendations of the Game Mods. Why would I expect the same Site Admins who blocked the enforcement of bannings against those found to be cheaters by the Game Mods to do better on their own esp. when they are not very competent in chess?
The product has been tarnished. A new system is needed. Celebrate the new system, and then rejoice in the wave of banning that comes from it.
Besides, who says the admins will be doing this on their own? Last time I looked, the details of the admin's plans were not revealed. Perhaps you shouldn't knock the new system before it is even in place. You don't know that it won't be better.
18 Jun 08
Originally posted by HindsteinIt is standard here for the admin not to reveal the details of his plans.
Besides, who says the admins will be doing this on their own? Last time I looked, the details of the admin's plans were not revealed. Perhaps you shouldn't knock the new system before it is even in place. You don't know that it won't be better.
The new 'system' is to string people along with votes, changes, excuses, and promises. And throw in a token banning or two so that technically, people cannot say you did nothing.
What else am I supposed to think when no action is taken against a player who is throwing games to certain players in a tournament? Maybe RHP would rather just be a 'casual' chess site like Yahoo.