09 Jan 05
Originally posted by arrakisI would just as soon as soon close this discussion, but you keep distorting the facts so you can continue to play the victim while at the same time accusing others of posting "hate mail" against you, I will again ask the question you have refused to answer.
YES! The game mods are supposed to protect members by limiting the amount of cheating.
While I'm here I'd like to mention that I accept all responsibility for the lag of time it took to lick JW off the team. Latex Bishop had suggested to me that we should kick him because of the messages posted that he was cheating, but he left it as my decision cause I ...[text shortened]... ate mail towards myself, but to those who can think for themselves and make their own decisions.
James Woodley was a 1200 rated player for many months. The evidence suggests that he cheated to even acheive that level by playing rigged games against ian93 (who was either a 2nd account or a friend deliberately losing to JW). In late September without any prior improvement, he suddenly starting winning EVERY GAME against players of equal rating and then against players rated hundreds of points higher. Please explain as someone of such vast experience how he could do this without cheating as I'm sure there are numerous players on this site who'd like to know how to improve their game in a similar non-cheating fashion.
You claim to be an experienced player and I believe that. You also claim that your experience qualifies you to be a Game Moderator. Please either answer the question above or admit that you made a lapse in judgment in late November by allowing Woodley on your team when the evidence, irrespective of any engine analysis, showed he was cheating as there is no other explanation for the facts above. If you will do that, I personally won't post anymore regarding the matter but if you keep insisting that the evidence in late November against Woodley was "insufficient" you are not qualified to be a Game Mod, period.
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by no1marauderI answered your question regarding JW's rating but maybe you missed it. When I got involved his rating was in the upper 1700's and when I looked at his profile it was never below 1500's. So I dunno about all the stuff that happened before I added him to our league. I certainly wouldn't have added him if I had read the many complaints against him in the forums - but I read those after having added him.
I would just as soon as soon close this discussion, but you keep distorting the facts so you can continue to play the victim while at the same time accusing others of posting "hate mail" against you, I will again ask the question you have refused to answer.
James Woodley was a 1200 rated player for many months. The evidence suggests ...[text shortened]... November against Woodley was "insufficient" you are not qualified to be a Game Mod, period.
I recognize yourself as a strong player. But I don't agree with many of your opinions and wish you'd stop badgering me about JW.
- Joined
- 20 Feb 02
- Moves
- 58336
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by arrakisYou do not have to take the responsibility over JW, I wanted to remove him but I made the decision to wait as you told me there may have been more to the issue than the simple black and white that others were making it seem. It was the right decision to wait until we were sure, and yes it has everything to do with him being a team mate.
YES! The game mods are supposed to protect members by limiting the amount of cheating.
While I'm here I'd like to mention that I accept all responsibility for the lag of time it took to lick JW off the team. Latex Bishop had suggested to me that we should kick him because of the messages posted that he was cheating, but he left it as my decision cause I ...[text shortened]... ate mail towards myself, but to those who can think for themselves and make their own decisions.
A lot of crap has been said about arrakis, all he ever investigated was whether JW was using as engine in his games using the techniques used by the ICC. He told me not to simply call someone a cheat, how ever much it looks like it, till you know for sure as that stuff sticks for life - knowing for sure means cheaking yourself rather than going with the trend of forum opinion. He did not look anywhere else other than in his proven techniques and methodology, and in doing so he found evidence of cheating, but not to the extent that some had said.
If you lot really think that someone who had a 2150+ OTB rating, was elected to investigate and judge on OTB cheating by the ICC, has 20 years or more experience of tackling cheating in chess, can confirm (like Dave Tebb and Greyeyes) who they really are and their OTB ratings, who has countless published works referenced on the web, and had the guts to stand up against all the crap over the JW affair, is not fit to be a game moderator on our little internet site then some people are losing touch with reality.
A lot of people are quick to criticise arrakis for not tossing JW to the wolves, but what is more messed up, him not being on the game moderators or cheshire cat (no offense meant Cat) getting on simply because the mumber of moves that player has made?
Every one thinks Dave Tebb should be a moderator as he is a top player, he has player at a very high level, he has exceptional knowledge of chess and subsequently databases and engines, and to top it off he a nice bloke as well - this I could not agree with more, and the same applies to greyeyes (I am not sure if many of the people voting for him actually know how good he really is at chess or just think he is Mr Fritz Basher). Arrakis has all these qualities also - don't let a few people slagging him in these forums move people from the cold facts, he is without doubt one of the most qualified people to be part of the game moderators, can only 42 people really see that???
Andrew
09 Jan 05
2 edits
Couldn't have put it better myself. I'd sooner have Arrakis with his sound and unbiased approach to actually examining the games - the only thing that counts - not the rumours, the ratings, the peaks in the graph, but the actual moves in the games!
As someone who was wrongly accused of cheating not long after I subscribed to the site by someone who hadn't even made a move against me purely on a peak in my graph I welcome the Game Moderators, not only to catch the guilty but to protect the innocent.
Once the Game Moderators are in place I hope that the Forum Admins will ensure that the cheat accusations will finally stop in the forums and people will be given the benefit of the doubt until proven guilty.
09 Jan 05
1 edit
Originally posted by arrakisThat's simply not true; look at JamesWoodley's rating graph on his profile RIGHT NOW (go ahead EVERYBODY who has voted for or is thinking of voting for Arrakis). With that, I'll say no more but if people and Russ believe that someone so willing to either ignore and/or twist facts and/or so careless about ascertaining them is a good choice for the Game Mods, then I have serious doubts about how successful we'll be in eliminating engine use on this site.
I answered your question regarding JW's rating but maybe you missed it. When I got involved his rating was in the upper 1700's and when I looked at his profile it was never below 1500's. So I dunno about all the stuff that happened befor ...[text shortened]... many of your opinions and wish you'd stop badgering me about JW.
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by ExyI strongly disagree with your premise; unexplained abrupt increases in a player's performance as shown in the ratings is relevant evidence of possible cheating. It is true that in almost all cases it will not be sufficient IN ITSELF to prove cheating, but I see no reason to ignore relevant facts because they are inconvenient to fellow clan members. And the moves themselves will have different meanings in different contexts: a legit 2100 player with a 80% match to a strong engine in a number of games will raise few eyebrows, while a player who was recently rated 1300-1500 with a low percentage of matches who suddenly starts matching up 80% and winning all his games will have to be considered suspicious. That is why as Dave Tebb said it is desirable for strong, experienced players to be on the Game Mods: to make intelligent judgments on shades of gray all the while conforming to Russ' command that the proof be "overwhelming". But when the TOTALITY of evidence is overwhelming, then they should not hesitate to say so regardless of who the player is.
Couldn't have put it better myself. I'd sooner have Arrakis with his sound and unbiased approach to actually examining the games - the only thing that counts - not the rumours, the ratings, the peaks in the graph, but the actual moves in the games!
As someone who was wrongly accused of cheating not long after I subscribed to the site by someone who hadn ...[text shortened]... inally stop in the forums and people will be given the benefit of the doubt until proven guilty.
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by no1marauderI went and looked at his chart. You are correct. I looked at his games and the rating they contained. Ok, so I made a mistake on that. As a lawyer you know that people tend to forget some aspects of the things they did in the past. Does that make me unqualified? All my analysis on his games was correct.
That's simply not true; look at JamesWoodley's rating graph on his profile RIGHT NOW (go ahead EVERYBODY who has voted for or is thinking of voting for Arrakis). With that, I'll say no more but if people and Russ believe that someone so willing to either ignore and/or twist facts and/or so careless about ascertaining them is a good choice for th ...[text shortened]... hen I have serious doubts about how successful we'll be in eliminating engine use on this site.
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by no1marauderI can see by your numerous posts and unsupported biased thinking, that you sir, are not qualified to say who or what would make a good game moderator. I think you personally have done more damage to RHP through your ignorance than any cheater ever has.
I strongly disagree with your premise; unexplained abrupt increases in a player's performance as shown in the ratings is relevant evidence of possible cheating. It is true that in almost all cases it will not be sufficient IN ITSELF to prove cheating, but I see no reason to ignore relevant facts because they are inconvenient to fellow clan membe ...[text shortened]... idence is overwhelming, then they should not hesitate to say so regardless of who the player is.
09 Jan 05
Originally posted by arrakisIgnorance of what? Apparently Russ doesn't agree with your absurd statement that I "have done more damage to RHP ............. than any cheater ever has" as I'm still here and your teammate James Woodley ain't. And considering your prior qualifications the fact that you have so relatively few votes in the Game Mod voting seems to strongly suggest that most people agree with me, not you. I support every post of mine with facts; you can't even read a rating graph - who's thinking is "unsupported" and "biased", Arrakis?
I can see by your numerous posts and unsupported biased thinking, that you sir, are not qualified to say who or what would make a good game moderator. I think you personally have done more damage to RHP through your ignorance than any cheater ever has.
- Joined
- 03 Sep 03
- Moves
- 87628
09 Jan 05
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderYou just remind me that this is ALL A GAME. The only person professionally involved is Russ. This stuff is not to be taken seriously.
Thanks, I think ..........................
Edit: chrismo too I think, professionally involved that is...
09 Jan 05
Arrakis and No1marauder both over-estimate their ability to damage RHP. The damage is all in their minds.
This topic is now history. Overblown and boring. RHP isn't being served by it. The only thing served by continuing with it are the egos of those involved.
Get over it. Grab a drink, relax, play some chess...