11 Jul 07
Originally posted by leisurelyslothNot cheating. It is pretty much the same as using Fritz to analyse your past games and keeping that analysis in a DB. That also is not cheating.
I recently played a game against a stronger player in which I followed a book line to a point at which the author said that I had "a decisive attack" but did not say how to carry out the attack--I guess it was supposed to be obvious, but I managed to mess it up and lose. 😳
Presumably I could purchase a copy of Fritz, plug in this game, and it co ...[text shortened]... in? Also, how do I know that the opening book author did not use Fritz in his/her analysis?
Of course you need to do this before you get to this point in the book and the first time you play the line this is unlikely to be the case.
Equally useful is analysing those losing book lines and finding an improvement.
23 Sep 07
Originally posted by cludiPeople didn't start getting banned until September 1, 2005.
How come players are allowed to play here for years before they get banned?
1. If no one reports them, they are probably not investigated. The game mods cannot possibly check every single user on the site.
2. The evidence against them has not been overwhelming enough for a ban. Remember, that we always give the players the benefit of the doubt. As a res ...[text shortened]... ases has been investigated for long periods of time before the evidence was strong enough for a ban.
05 Mar 08
3 edits
Originally posted by cludiBump ..... 🙂
Do banned players get a chance to defend themselves?
No.
The game mods present the evidence to the site admins who then decide whether to ban or not.
Some people have compared the banning of players to a case in the court of law where the accused are allowed to defend themselves. This is, however, quite a different situation for at least 2 reasons:
ng this a place for people to play without an engine helping or deciding their next move......[/b]
EDIT: the quote has been edited quite a bit, but I'm sure you get the drift and can find the original up there ^ !
EDIT 2: Unless it's been removed.
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by KeplerI think you are incorrect in your statement here. You comment should be toned down a bit due to the following.
Exactly, and no one needs to justify it. This is not a court of law, it is a business and the proprietors can allow or disallow use of the facilities as and when they please.
Your comment is only true to a point. The players (buyer) purchases a product (chess games at RHP) for an agreed price (fee). There is a problem called implied merchantibility that you deal with that basically says, the seller (RHP) must provide the goods or service as advertised (within reason) or they are guilty of committing a tort against the buyer (us). There are terms of agreement that both parties agree to be bound by at the time of the purchase. The topic of cheating is in that agreement as well as the proposed penalty of permanent expulsion from the site. If the party is guilty of cheating, RHP is well within its rights to ban the player(s) in question. However, if RHP were to ban an innocent player, that player would be entitled to, at minimum, a refund of the proportionate share of the annual fee that was unused or unuseable.
I believe that this is the reason that such due diligence must be employed with as much supporting eveidence as practical to keep matters out of the courts (obviously small claims court).
05 Mar 08
Originally posted by shortcircuitAre you trying to talk "legal"?
I think you are incorrect in your statement here. You comment should be toned down a bit due to the following.
Your comment is only true to a point. The players (buyer) purchases a product (chess games at RHP) for an agreed price (fee). There is a problem called implied merchantibility that you deal with that basically says, the seller (RHP) must pro ...[text shortened]... porting eveidence as practical to keep matters out of the courts (obviously small claims court).
If so, I'm afraid your post doesn't make any sense.
Where it does make some sense, it's completely wrong.
p.s. Tort has nothing to do with this.
06 Mar 08
1 edit
Originally posted by cludiAre there any reasons why a player should be exempt from this rule ?
I've noticed that everytime one or more users are banned a new thread is started in this forum to discuss the "new" cheaters. I've also noticed that only a few posts into these threads, the same questions inevitably pop up:
How do we know they're cheating?
Do they get a chance to defend themselves? etc etc.
For future reference, please allow me to an ce for people to play without an engine helping or deciding their next move......
It is surely universally applied.