Go back
Non subscribers and chess engine cheats

Non subscribers and chess engine cheats

General

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by jamjamjoe
I strongly subscribe to the fact that non subscribers are the biggest chess engine cheats on RHP. A non subsciber with only 6 games going, is more inclined to cheat than a subscriber with 250 games! And the annoying part is that they keep sending you reminders when they think they are winning. Isn't it amazing that we have non subscribers who have a ratin ...[text shortened]... trength would easily subscribe. Let's do away with non subscribers who exceed a rating of 1700.
This is only the opinion of you. I'm guessing a non subcriber put a boot in your ass, and because they didn't have a star, you think they cheat. Who wants to have to BUY their rating?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Alpha10
Who wants to have to BUY their rating?
Can't top that.

Vote Up
Vote Down

The reality is this: Russ ain't dumb. And the non-dumb can see that if the non-subscription restrictions had been greater than what they currently are, less people would have subscribed. Also, the real money is in advertising, not subscription. The more people registered on a site (regardless of subscription status), the more potential income from advertising. Russ has got it sorted.

Now, as for the apparent problems of non-subscribers: if you have a problem with them, don't play them and don't read the forums. Problem solved.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by dfm65
1. not having a credit card doesn't matter. you can pay by money order for example.
2. if you don't have the money, then tough. you can't walk into, say, a music store and say 'i want these CDs - i don't have any money, but i want them so you should give them to me for free'.
I would not walk into CD store and ask for the CDs I want for free... but if they offer free CDs! why not to go and take them !? Same here ... Just because you paid some amount of money and I didn't, doesn't mean that you can advocate for restrictions to the non-subscribers usage of this site! We have our 6 games and tat is more than we want !

Vote Up
Vote Down

Yep. I have lost many games to non subs and yes it hurts to pay to lose to one who is not paying. I take it all with a pinch of salt but right now I am boycotting non subs...

Vote Up
Vote Down

I am. Mainly because I have quite enough games with just clan challenges, tournaments and games against my buddies.
Why would I waste my time playing against a non-sub?

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Pullhard
The reality is this: Russ ain't dumb. And the non-dumb can see that if the non-subscription restrictions had been greater than what they currently are, less people would have subscribed. Also, the real money is in advertising, not subscription. The more people registered on a site (regardless of subscription status), the more potential income from advertis ...[text shortened]... s: if you have a problem with them, don't play them and don't read the forums. Problem solved.
Maybe that is so. Maybe they also don't care about cheats if there are such.

These arguments come up all the time if someone thinks they are being ripped off by cheats surely they should run off to Russ and get him or his cheat police to check out the questionable game.
Seems drippy to whinge in here.

I don't like some non-subcribers playing off a p1200 then telling me half way through a game as they tear me apart that they use to play on another site at 1700+ ..

I now refuse challenges from non-subs and non-profiles and from people who have dropped their rating artifically by 200 or so by mass resignation or time out.. My choice is a friendly game and a chat with no open books or databases.

2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

There are many valid reasons for people not to subscribe. For example...my subscription is set not to renew after it expires. As I work full time (like many) and have returned to college (as did my wife) and have children to tend to, I really don't have much time for chess right now. I don't have any current games going, but may pick up one or two. Why on earth would I pay for a subscription to continue that I am not in a position to take advantage of it? I continue to be a fan of this site, and recommend it to everyone I meet that shows any interest in chess (like all the other geeks at the chess book section of Barnes & Noble). I intend to subscribe and become active again at some point in the future, but just don't have the time now. I'm certain that I am not the only perosn who simply doesn't have as much time as they'd like, but many can probably manage a few games. As far as non-subscribers being cheaters...well, there's really no practical way that I am aware of to prevent anyone from cheating if they are creative enough. If you find a clique of players who you are personally comfortable with, play them exclusively. Otherwise, accept that you may get burned occasionally and then forget about it. It isn't as though these ratings are real.

Vote Up
Vote Down

No comments on my points regarding underestimation of the importance of non-subs towards financing this site?

Do we all agree then?

1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by jamjamjoe
I strongly subscribe to the fact that non subscribers are the biggest chess engine cheats on RHP. A non subsciber with only 6 games going, is more inclined to cheat than a subscriber with 250 games! And the annoying part is that they keep ...[text shortened]... . Let's do away with non subscribers who exceed a rating of 1700.
i don't cheat at all. Ever.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Palynka
Did you lose again to a non-subscriber?

That must hurt, paying to lose against someone who is not paying...
😕