Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Clans Forum

Clans Forum

  1. Subscriber roma45
    st johnstone
    26 Apr '17 20:49
    i wonder who actually won the 2016 clab challenge?

    obviously after the punishment vote won despite the fact sinister forces attempted the ELO to be victorious.

    i thought a system was already in place to punish cheats by removing points and clan suspensions, it has happened before, but we had to vote for well something thats already been done before?

    integrity and honest clan leaders disgusted by the antics of big mouthed robbie and the sheep sisters sent a message.


    A MESSAGE LOUD AND CLEAR. WE DONT WANT CHEATS ON HERE


    Now i wonder who really won?

    any ideas?
  2. Subscriber moonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    28 Apr '17 05:54
    I vote: No one won 2016.

    Just for comparison, the Tour de France declared no winner after Lance Armstrong's cheat was revealed:

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2012/10/15/lance-armstrong-tour-de-france-doping/1635499/

    Until we have determined what constitutes unsporting behaviour, no clan is above suspicion (yup, including my clan). We've been playing in a rule-free zone, and if clans are going to be punished ex post facto, there's no knowing what was unsporting behaviour in 2016 (or even before).
  3. Subscriber roma45
    st johnstone
    28 Apr '17 10:01
    Originally posted by moonbus
    I vote: No one won 2016.

    Just for comparison, the Tour de France declared no winner after Lance Armstrong's cheat was revealed:

    https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/cycling/2012/10/15/lance-armstrong-tour-de-france-doping/1635499/

    Until we have determined what constitutes unsporting behaviour, no clan is above suspicion (yup, including my clan). We ...[text shortened]... nished ex post facto, there's no knowing what was unsporting behaviour in 2016 (or even before).
    When Ben Johnson won gold in the 100m the drugs cheat got it taken off him and Carl Lewis got the gold.

    Since many Russians have been banned recently other contestants have had their medals upgraded
    Cycling might not care but other sports do
    Russ has even said collusion took place last year strategic ultimatum got points removed and clan suspended in 2015
    There should never have been a need for a vote total waste of time
    Russ should have
    1) removed points and issued warning or suspended clans involved
    Or
    2) make a statement no rules broken nothing will happen
    But as we know picked option
    3) just ignore it

    Total farce we got asked for ideas then got a vote which to me was obviously attempted to sway the outcome so he did not have to deal with the cheats
    Epic fail the punishment vote won
    Now what? Back to option 3 by the look of it
  4. Subscriber moonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    29 Apr '17 07:37
    Originally posted by roma45
    When Ben Johnson won gold in the 100m the drugs cheat got it taken off him and Carl Lewis got the gold.

    Since many Russians have been banned recently other contestants have had their medals upgraded
    Cycling might not care but other sports do
    Russ has even said collusion took place last year strategic ultimatum got points removed and clan suspended in 20 ...[text shortened]... ith the cheats
    Epic fail the punishment vote won
    Now what? Back to option 3 by the look of it
    Carl Lewis was beyond reproach and there were clear definitions of what would count as cheating in that contest. This case is different: here we have no clear definition what counts as sporting behaviour and what not. Here, there are no rules about sandbagging or collusion or 'creative clan management'. I want to see some clear definitions before awarding any other clan the 2016 crown retrospectively. Until then, no amnesty and no winner.
  5. Subscriber roma45
    st johnstone
    30 Apr '17 13:24
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Carl Lewis was beyond reproach and there were clear definitions of what would count as cheating in that contest. This case is different: here we have no clear definition what counts as sporting behaviour and what not. Here, there are no rules about sandbagging or collusion or 'creative clan management'. I want to see some clear definitions before awarding any other clan the 2016 crown retrospectively. Until then, no amnesty and no winner.
    sorry you are wrong, there already is a clear definition of unsporting behaviour plus actions that has been taken,

    clans before colluded to draw lots of games, "aim high clan" main culprit, points got removed
    then strategic ultimatum and ucff in 2015, clans got suspended then points eventually removed.

    one thing in common? they broke no TOS rules that did not stop the site punishing them there should never need a fair play or sportsmanship rule to be acually written, common manners should be enough

    alas no, the majority of the banned strategic ultimatum clan formed new clans, handed the easy riders over 700 points by a combination of time outs selecting dead players, even resigning when one move from winning while gloating "its not against the rules"

    they said it was a protest, total BS these are serious sad little spiteful boys who enjoy wrecking things, one of the main "protesters" even runs a rival site, looks like hes trying to take money from RHP by encouraging players not to buy subs,

    so the punishment vote has nothing to do with what rules are written, its common manners which the cheats have none of, unsporting behaviour has been punished in the past it must be done now. but more brutal future punishment to come if they ore any player steps out of line
  6. 30 Apr '17 18:35
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Carl Lewis was beyond reproach and there were clear definitions of what would count as cheating in that contest. This case is different: here we have no clear definition what counts as sporting behaviour and what not. Here, there are no rules about sandbagging or collusion or 'creative clan management'. I want to see some clear definitions before awarding any other clan the 2016 crown retrospectively. Until then, no amnesty and no winner.
    When Ben Johnson was stripped of the gold, I recall hearing stories that every one of the 8 finalists was on something.
    Poor Ben just got caught.
  7. Subscriber moonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    30 Apr '17 21:08
    Originally posted by roma45
    sorry you are wrong, there already is a clear definition of unsporting behaviour plus actions that has been taken,

    clans before colluded to draw lots of games, "aim high clan" main culprit, points got removed
    then strategic ultimatum and ucff in 2015, clans got suspended then points eventually removed.

    one thing in common? they broke no TOS rules that ...[text shortened]... be done now. but more brutal future punishment to come if they ore any player steps out of line
    Which just goes to show that punitive measures don't work. Clans were punished before and here we are again ...

    So, what exactly is the definition of "unsporting behaviour"? Just so we all agree what is liable to be punished again next year. And the year after that ...
  8. Subscriber roma45
    st johnstone
    30 Apr '17 21:54
    Originally posted by moonbus
    Which just goes to show that punitive measures don't work. Clans were punished before and here we are again ...

    So, what exactly is the definition of "unsporting behaviour"? Just so we all agree what is liable to be punished again next year. And the year after that ...
    As I have said before the punishments must get more severe even banning player who repeat

    Back to the Ben Johnson banning it did not stop cheats when he got banned so should the athletes board just given up on punishing future cheats?
    You seem to be sticking up for the riders really not wanting them punished despite the fact it's been explained over and over hidden agenda?

    There will be no future in the clans unless a punishment is handed out if it happens again ban them for life.

    The clan leaders have voted the punishment vote won
    No amnesty
    No time limit
    The cheats have lost
  9. Subscriber moonbus
    Uber-Nerd
    01 May '17 05:25
    You talking about "manners," in this forum — now that's rich.
  10. Subscriber roma45
    st johnstone
    01 May '17 20:48
    Originally posted by moonbus
    You talking about "manners," in this forum — now that's rich.
    rich would be someone who is a recent sub and only played a couple of games telling every one how the clan system should be run, while defending the biggest cheats ever and harping on about "good chess"

    nay that's not rich more daft