Originally posted by Grand Master GavWhy are you shooting yourself in the foot?
Please read whole thread it'll make sense a bit more. Since simply asking for a little more transparency with the descision making and stating the climate on the competitive side of the site had gone down a bit I have also been somewhat accused. Please forbid anyone should simply ask a question or two. However the thread now proves my point. Didn' ...[text shortened]... ums were so... erm teenage.
Bye all.. Good luck and enjoy
And for the last time Toodle-pip
Originally posted by bbarrYou make it sound like it all happened simultaneously.
You should learn to pay more attention. Mateulose was accusing Ironman31 primarily, No1 and others were freaking out about JamesWoodley, and TRACKHEAD21 was accusing people left and right, and being accused in return. Accusations were rampant, and coming from all directions. This was what led to the formation of the game moderators in the first place.
D
Originally posted by bbarrOh I pay attention alright, I've just got a sh!t memory for stuff that I don't particularly care about.
You should learn to pay more attention. Mateulose was accusing Ironman31 primarily, No1 and others were freaking out about JamesWoodley, and TRACKHEAD21 was accusing people left and right, and being accused in return. Accusations were rampant, and coming from all directions. This was what led to the formation of the game moderators in the first place.
Originally posted by RagnorakYes, so what? Russ announced on December 1st of last year (almost one year ago) that he was going to form a team of game moderators. He did this because of the rampant accusations in the forums, and the concerns of many on the site about engine use. The accusations continued during the long delay after this announcement, and TRACKHEAD21 participated in those bouts of accusation as well. You're simply wrong on this point, Ragnorak. Go and read the threads.
I wouldn't consider Trackhead's allegations as being "just prior to the establishment of the game moderators". That series of accusations happened over a year ago.
D
2 edits
Originally posted by RagnorakAgain, go back and read the threads. The point is that accusations were rampant prior to the establishment of the game mods, and they are not nearly so common now. So, your original claim about the current state of affairs being worse in this regard is simply false.
You make it sound like it all happened simultaneously.
D
And just so we are clear on this point, this is a post of yours from late November of last year, less than two weeks from the date Russ announced that there would be game mods:
From:21 Nov '04 05:34
I'm playing a guy/gal at the moment, who has gone from being 1100-1200 up to September up to (and still rising) 1741. If you look at any of his games pre-magical date in september, then you will see he definitely doesn't play to 1741 standard.
He also matches 95% to Shredder 6 in the games analysed after this date.
What more proof could people want?
D
http://www.chessatwork.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=15723&page=13
You then go on to confirm the name of this user in subsequent posts.
Even you were hurling accusations prior to the formation of the game mods!
1 edit
Originally posted by arrakisThis is not a popularity contest. We are not running for office. We have volunteered to do a difficult and time consuming task.
The group should first of all establish their credibility with the membership ... BUST the A-holes here who are preying on the membership and who are not well liked! Once you've established your credibility you can go after the "nice guys".
Cases are tackled on a first-in first-out basis, and mostly come from non-trivial complaints received from RHP members. Only the evidence is considered.
Whether someone is "nice" or not has nothing to do with game moderation. If we allowed such considerations to determine our actions then we would surely lose all credibility.
Basically you are saying to cheats "Be nice guys, be popular, make lots of friends and the Game Mods will leave you alone." Where is the credibility and the integrity in that?
Everyone deserves equal respect and fair treatment.
Originally posted by bbarrI'm not interested in getting into a semantics argument with you as I find them boring. In brief: "Just prior to" to me isn't 4 months, and has completely different meaning to "prior to". The establishment of the game mods and Russ announcing the concept of the game mods are two very different things. I didn't claim that the current state of affairs as regards cheating accusations is worse now. I also never confirmed the user in subsequent posts as you state.
Again, go back and read the threads. The point is that accusations were rampant prior to the establishment of the game mods, and they are not nearly so common now. So, your original claim about the current state of affairs being worse in this regard is simply false.
And just so we are clear on this point, this is a post of yours from late November of last ...[text shortened]... subsequent posts.
Even you were hurling accusations prior to the formation of the game mods!
Its true I stated that I was playing somebody (without providing a name) who was definitely an engine. In a thread trying to get something done about engine use on the site. At the time, there was no official policy regarding enforcement of 3b. This thread and a couple of others like it brought about the concept of the game mods.
D
Originally posted by bbarrGood find, wise man.
Again, go back and read the threads. The point is that accusations were rampant prior to the establishment of the game mods, and they are not nearly so common now. So, your original claim about the current state of affairs being worse in this regard is simply false.
And just so we are clear on this point, this is a post of yours from late November of last ...[text shortened]... subsequent posts.
Even you were hurling accusations prior to the formation of the game mods!
3 edits
Originally posted by RagnorakYou claimed the following:
I'm not interested in getting into a semantics argument with you as I find them boring. In brief: "Just prior to" to me isn't 4 months, and has completely different meaning to "prior to". The establishment of the game mods and Russ announcing the concept of the game mods are two very different things. I didn't claim that the current state of affai ...[text shortened]... 3b. This thread and a couple of others like it brought about the concept of the game mods.
D
It seems that the administrators' efforts to reign in cheating accusations in the forums have been as successful as dubya's attempts to make the world a safer place.
I responded:
There are many, many fewer accusations now than just prior to the establishment of the game moderators.
You responded:
I don't think so.
But now you claim:
I didn't claim that the current state of affairs as regards cheating accusations is worse now.
Feel free to contradict yourself all you like. When you read the actual threads, you'll find that cheating accusations were rampant prior to Russ' announcing the formation of the game mods. They continued through the establishment of the game mods. Now, there are many fewer cheating accusations than there were prior to either Russ's Dec. 1 announcement or to the actual formation of the game mods. It is simply better now in the forums regarding accusations. That's what you originally denied with your allusion to Bush, and that is where you are flat wrong. If you don't want to get into a semantic argument, then don't!
Oops, you're right, it was two other users that confirmed the name of the alleged cheat. Though this was pretty easy for them to do, since you specified his exact rating, and which tournament you were playing him in. His name was posted by another user that same day. By what semantic hand waving does this not qualify as an accusation?
Originally posted by rhbThat may well be possible, I've made a lot of enemies lately, mind you, they are people I would never be-friend. Sometimes, at the very least to comfort you're integrity, it's good to have the RIGHT enemies, and the RIGHT allies. I may well go down because of heated exchanges with those who have declared themselves thy enemy against me without hardly knowing me, but it wouldn't be my fault, it would be a case of a popularity contest. I'm not afraid to take on those who are popular.
And I predict you are gonna land on your a$$ with a pretty big thud soon enough
😛
Originally posted by UmalakasYou know multiple accounts is breaking the TOS just as much as using 3rd party assistance in games.
That may well be possible, I've made a lot of enemies lately, mind you, they are people I would never be-friend. Sometimes, at the very least to comfort you're integrity, it's good to have the RIGHT enemies, and the RIGHT allies. I may well go down because of heated exchanges with those who have declared themselves thy enemy against me without hardly kno ...[text shortened]... t, it would be a case of a popularity contest. I'm not afraid to take on those who are popular.
D
1 edit
Originally posted by bbarrThe problem now is, though, instead of cheating accusations, we have the "he/she my friend or lover, they can't be guilty and cheating! They are soooooooo nice! Bring them back! I think I'm gonna cry!"
You claimed the following:
[b]It seems that the administrators' efforts to reign in cheating accusations in the forums have been as successful as dubya's attempts to make the world a safer place.
I responded:
There are many, many fewer accusations now than just prior to the establishment of the game moderators.
You responded:
I d ...[text shortened]... heat in a cheeky response to a user's guess as to their identity. So don't give me that crap!
I honestly can't beleive people get sooooooo attached on an INTERNET CHESS SITE. Why don't these people try to get married instead?