14 Oct 05
Well, if we're going to have a 'vote by posting' set of threads, I want to take the middle road.
I don't want the mods to show us all the evidence. I would like, however, some more information than simply saying someone was found to have been cheating. Were they cheating in all their games? Were they found to have cheated only in certain games, or in endgames, or in tournaments? How exactly did they cheat (assuming there are varieties in method, I really don't know enough about these things).
Please post in this thread only if you agree
Oh, and thanks for the idea Jay.
14 Oct 05
Originally posted by orfeoI'm not sure I agree, and I though I'd better post a reply to tell you this.
Well, if we're going to have a 'vote by posting' set of threads, I want to take the middle road.
I don't want the mods to show us all the evidence. I [b]would like, however, some more information than simply saying someone was found to have been cheating. Were they cheating in all their games? Were they found to have cheated only in certain games, ...[text shortened]... ngs).
Please post in this thread only if you agree
Oh, and thanks for the idea Jay.[/b]
Have I messed up your thread?
14 Oct 05
1 edit
I agree.
There's no way that the mod's decisions will ever recieve widespead acceptance if they don't share some evidence. The game mods weren't created to harshly punish all cheaters for sheer pleasure, they were created to make RHP a better place to play chess. If we don't accept their decisions, I think it only becomes a more hostile place.
14 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by orfeoWe could be at this for a while then.
Absolutely. I shall just have to start a new one. 😛
I know you are joking really.. but why deny the right to open debate on this via a petition? You will only trigger a petition for the opposite. Edit - see! http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=31264&page=1
I will post what I posted in Jay's thread as it applies equally here:
I don't agree. If you are not cheating there is nothing to be concerned with.
The best conmen(people) will come over as the most likeable people in the world. That's how they get away with it.
14 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by RagnorakBecause the cheats have been caught. Call it blind faith, but I trust the system. Russ is running a business here and can't afford to gamble on a flawed game mod system - the reputation of the site is at stake.
And you know this, how?
D
Would you expect your bank to publish exact details of how it caught it's fraudsters, or partial details of the evidence behind the decision? I wouldn't, infact I wouldn't even expect them to name and shame them.
14 Oct 05
Originally posted by rhbUmmm, yeah I would actually. At least publish them to the few present in court at the trial.
Would you expect your bank to publish exact details of how it caught it's fraudsters, or partial details of the evidence behind the decision? I wouldn't, infact I wouldn't even expect them to name and shame them.
I definitely wouldn't expect to see people I know disappear in the night because the bank has said that they are fraudsters without providing any sort of evidence.
D
14 Oct 05
1 edit
Originally posted by RagnorakYou know what, you got me there! 🙄
Ummm, yeah I would actually. At least publish them to the few present in court at the [b]trial.
I definitely wouldn't expect to see people I know disappear in the night because the bank has said that they are fraudsters without providing any sort of evidence.
D[/b]
Edit: although my original point was in reference to the customer base of the bank, not those concerned to enter the public gallery of the trial or to read the court reports, so as tenuous as that is I think there's a point there somewhere 😛
15 Oct 05
Originally posted by RagnorakRules are rules the bank got their rules and the mods got better ones
Ummm, yeah I would actually. At least publish them to the few present in court at the [b]trial.
I definitely wouldn't expect to see people I know disappear in the night because the bank has said that they are fraudsters without providing any sort of evidence.
D[/b]
15 Oct 05
Originally posted by orfeoI don't agree. this a dangerous slope. And in actual fact the banned are only getting chucked off a chess site.
Well, if we're going to have a 'vote by posting' set of threads, I want to take the middle road.
I don't want the mods to show us all the evidence. I [b]would like, however, some more information than simply saying someone was found to have been cheating. Were they cheating in all their games? Were they found to have cheated only in certain games, ...[text shortened]... ngs).
Please post in this thread only if you agree
Oh, and thanks for the idea Jay.[/b]
But: If say game mod showed 5 games where there was a high match to an engine. Someone else could find 25 games where the same players match was low.
The arguements would get deeper. The mods would have an even harder job. If Mods are to work, they must be gods. We must trust them.
15 Oct 05
Originally posted by rhbThe problem is, there is no public gallery at RHP, or a trial for that matter.
Edit: although my original point was in reference to the customer base of the bank, not those concerned to enter the public gallery of the trial or to read the court reports, so as tenuous as that is I think there's a point there somewhere 😛