08 Mar 04
Originally posted by PhlabibitI'm in total agreement. Sen. Joe McCarthy is alive and well here at the forums:'( No trials just convictions😞
Not that I am all about people pointing out cheats... but there are 3 forums where people are writing about cheaters.
Chess
Help and site ideas
General
Perhaps if we had another forum named Chess Cheats people who care could check in, leaving the other threads for what they are for.
P-
08 Mar 04
Originally posted by trekkieWell, if your sick of it, do something about it. PM the admin to put some sort of 'game block' in. It's our 'paid for' bandwidth that these cheaters are poaching. My solution is simple : non PS get a max of one move, per game per day. And no listing on the player tables until they complete a probation period.
Good idea, i am sick of seeing threads about cheaters in the 'only chess' forum.
skeeter
08 Mar 04
1 edit
Originally posted by skeeterI think that might be a bit extreme, as it might mean that new people don't get a big enough "bite" to appreciate the fun involved in the site, and thus might be inclined to leave before getting "lured in" past the point of no return... 😉
Well, if your sick of it, do something about it. PM the admin to put some sort of 'game block' in. It's our 'paid for' bandwidth that these cheaters are poaching. My solution is simple : non PS get a max of one move, per game per day. ...[text shortened]... r tables until they complete a probation period.
skeeter
A better option in my view would be to prevent anyone from playing more than 2 concurrent games against the same non-subscribed memeber. Also, if the game took less than a week (again in a game where one of the players was a non-subscriber), then a new game between those two players could not be started for some quarantine period - a week, for example.
That, I think, would make life a lot more difficult for cheaters, with minimal if any inconvenience to honest players.
-Jarno
08 Mar 04
Originally posted by PhlabibitSomething has. I goaded that little twerp into logging on with both accounts and then posting to each other to "prove 'that they were different people. What happened was that the posts and replies were so quick that they either had to be sitting next to each other or he had networked computers with an account on each. Chrismo would have spotted that and that the IP's were identical as he has removed all the threads.
Will be interesting to see what is done. Something will be done, I am sure...
P-
Besides that ballingsomeone admitted as much in a pm and wanted to know if he would be booted.
skeeter
09 Mar 04
Originally posted by skeeterHe shouldn't have rattled your cage! 😉
Something has. I goaded that little twerp into logging on with both accounts and then posting to each other to "prove 'that they were different people. What happened was that the posts and replies were so quick that they either had to be sitting next to each other or he had networked computers with an account on each. Chrismo would have spotted that and th ...[text shortened]... hat ballingsomeone admitted as much in a pm and wanted to know if he would be booted.
skeeter
P-
09 Mar 04
I've got an idea (probably about as practical as all my others):
how about upping the stakes on cheating/accusing people of cheating? Make a rule that anyone who publically accuses another of cheating puts their account on the line by doing so. If investigation proves beyond reasonable doubt that cheating was taking place then the cheaters account is suspended. But if it is decided that cheating cannot be proven (suspicion is not enought) then the accuser has their account suspended. This would give clear deterent to cheating but it would also cut down on the number of accusations based on speculation.
OK, so it's no practical, but I like the idea anyway. Otherwise we will need another forum. And another for religeon/politics/morals too.