08 Jul 08
Originally posted by Dragon FireThe Hypocrite of the Thread Award goes to: Dragon Fire!
I have spent a lot of time making detailed suggestions on targeted investigations designed to rapidly eliminate the worst and most obvious cheaters. I have PM'd sort of the "game mods".
I would like to see rapid in roads into this problem at the higher levels yet you are using an issue with a 1300 cheater called blobby to muddy the water. This is not ...[text shortened]... e. Can you not debate the facts with the objective of finding a solution that actually works.
DF: No you are just an arrogant tosser who is really beginning to piss me off!
Don't whine about "personal attacks" when you started them. I've been talking about "objective facts" in these matters for more than 3 and a half years. I already gave my reasons why paying attention to rapidly rising graphs and complaints concerning lower rated players should be considered; I thought you had conceded the point, but for some bizarre reason you keep choosing to insist that someone who was banned for engine use couldn't possibly have been banned for engine use! Even in the face of statements from people who would have inside knowledge of the matter! What does this say about your reasoning process? Nothing good, I'm afraid; you seem utterly incapable of admitting you were wrong no matter what evidence is provided.
- Joined
- 07 Jan 08
- Moves
- 34575
09 Jul 08
3 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderWrong. If you want to demonstrate that someone is a nitwit then by all means do so. In the context stated, however, all you were doing is calling someone a name; a personal attack.
It's an accurate and precise characterization of how DF is acting as regards this point. He refuses to accept the word of one of the Game Mods who recommended the banning of Blobby and insists that I spend hours analyzing games of a player banned 3 and a 1/2 years ago for engine cheating. Only a "nitwit" would demand such a thing rather than simply admit he was wrong regarding the matter.
Now I am not taking sides and this subject bored me to tears dozens of posts ago, but a personal attack is a personal attack. A personal attack isn't when someone merely disagrees with you, and all too often people will claim that as a "personal attack", but when you or anyone else resorts to names and/or vulgarities then it is a personal attack. Whether someone else did it to you is hardly grounds to engage in that kind of behaviour.
09 Jul 08
Originally posted by BadwaterI don't really care what you "think". Have you ever actually posted here before? And you admit you have no interest in the subject. That makes you a "troll" for posting here.
Wrong. If you want to demonstrate that someone is a nitwit then by all means do so. In the context stated, however, all you were doing is calling someone a name; a personal attack.
Now I am not taking sides and this subject bored me to tears dozens of posts ago, but a personal attack is a personal attack. A personal attack isn't when someone merel ...[text shortened]... ck. Whether someone else did it to you is hardly grounds to engage in that kind of behaviour.
09 Jul 08
Originally posted by no1marauderWhether he posted before or has an interest in the subject is unrelated to his point.
I don't really care what you "think". Have you ever actually posted here before? And you admit you have no interest in the subject. That makes you a "troll" for posting here.
09 Jul 08
Originally posted by no1marauderPerhaps I need to repeat an earlier post I made from this thread
The Hypocrite of the Thread Award goes to: Dragon Fire!
DF: No you are just an arrogant tosser who is really beginning to piss me off!
Don't whine about "personal attacks" when you started them. I've been talking about "objective facts" in these matters for more than 3 and a half years. I already gave my reasons why ...[text shortened]... seem utterly incapable of admitting you were wrong no matter what evidence is provided.
I don't want to underplay this problem nor imply that nothing should be done about it but firstly it is not as easy as you think (to identify cheaters) and secondly I do believe some posters are exaggerating the problem. That doesn't mean it isn't a problem and nothing should be done but it also doesn't mean we should see cheaters around every corner.
For a start if someone is graded 1300 - 1600 and really is cheating they clearly are not doing it very well so whilst what they are doing is wrong is it really of massive concern,
If someone is cheating for a couple of moves a game doesn't that mean 95% of the moves have to be found by him. The 2 moves for which engine assistance was required will count for nothing in the scheme of things and he will still lose. It doesn't make these actions right but its effect on the gamne result and hence on most of us is also negligible.
The same cannot be said about players whose ratings are soaring into the stratosphere unbeaten at 1800 and soon to be 2300 and it is these players who have the most adverse impact on us all. Better efforts must be made to identify them and there are some simple automated ways to do this.
(1) any new player still unbeaten after say 30 games comes under immediate scrutiny;
(2) every player in the top 100 (top 50 if thats too many) comes under scrutiny when first entering this level and is thereafter subjected to random checks;
(3) any player languishiung in the doldrums who shows a sudden improvement comes under immediate scrutiny.
Any one else comes under scrutiny if enough members report him (with evidence) but frankly if we focus on 1, 2 and 3 there will be few to worry about among the rest.
I posted this before you started muddiing the water with Mr Blobby and I remain unconvinced that the main problem that needs addressing is not with the high level cheats but if Mr Blobby did rise from 800 to 1300 in a matter of weeks playings 100s of moves a day and beating 1700+ then he very clearly comes into category 3 above. Also if he is playing at that level he clearly is no longer playing as a 1300 and by my definition he is not a 1300 player but simply a cheat.
I earlier stated that I define a 1300 player as a player who has been at that level for some time with results forming a normal distribution curve around his mean rating and I simply do not believe despite what you and eldragonfly are saying that cheats are rampant among such players.
09 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by eldragonflyI would expect that if a site is "absolutely overrun" then the vast majority (say 90%+) of players would actually be engines. If you had used a little less hyperbole (simply "overrun" ) then I would suppose that a simple majority (>50% ) would be engine users. I have no idea what you would regard as "overrun", either absolutely or otherwise, hence the question. I am just trying to get a handle on the scale of the problem.
You first.
09 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Dragon FireFor the third time: please cite to ANY post of mine that could possibly be construed to support your ridiculous claim that I believe that cheating is rampant among 1300 rated players here. Or stop lying about it.
Perhaps I need to repeat an earlier post I made from this thread
[i/]I don't want to underplay this problem nor imply that nothing should be done about it but firstly it is not as easy as you think (to identify cheaters) and secondly I do believe some posters are exaggerating the problem. That doesn't mean it isn't a problem and nothing should be done ve despite what you and eldragonfly are saying that cheats are rampant among such players.
Thank you.
09 Jul 08
Originally posted by KeplerThat is simply untrue. In the first post, the OP said this:
To be fair, most of your points are actually irrelevant to the original point of this thread.
NorrisB: I have no desire to play in a siege or in a tournament forced to play some engine user for a worthless title.
!~TONY~! responded (in the second post) by claiming that cheating doesn't effect the vast majority of players here and that the amount of cheating here is vastly exaggerated (by "50 fold"😉.
My posts are all relevant to those claims though !~TONY~! has retreated from at least the first.
09 Jul 08
Originally posted by Dragon FireNo1 never said what you are saying about 1300 players.
No 1 doesn't know what he is talking about. He thinks this site is infested with engine users rated 1300 and I happen to disagree with him.
When he proves his ridiculous claims I will gladly withdraw my comments but until them I reserve the right to think of him as a arrogant tosser who thinks he knows everything but really knows nothing.
Blobby was removed for engine use, that is FACT. It was chessmaster.
You stated something like, "Most 3b users were not engine users at all".
What would make you say something as fact that you have no clue about?
No1 submitted Tens of names, and watched them removed based on real evidence he sent in, and hard work done by the game mods. We took his info as a good reason to check these users, and based on info WE derived they were removed.
You know little about this subject, so don't treat your speculation as fact and don't put words in No1's mouth and he wont need to tell you you are wrong.
P-