Originally posted by Very RustyThey're not fool proof, no tool is. I saw the literally hundreds of discussions about this and understand the risks and the benefits of the current system.
absolutely not, and nothing has been explained, there are big parts left out. What are these other tools used for example? That only the chosen few know about, and can't say? Are they tools that could be debated on how fool proof they are?
Lots of question unanswered, but you don't really know, or care , your are just staying on side, like the good yes boy that you are.
There are only two possible reasons why these hundreds of discussions weren't enough for you.
Originally posted by Very RustyI think it was pointed out many times - Admins are not banning suspects if they are not for 100% sure. There have been cases when Admins disagreed with opinion of Game Mods.
The question still remains is the way the analysis done. Can they say with absolute 100% certainty that the person is a cheat on every occasion? That would be to say that the humans never made a mistake if the answer is yes.
I know they say it is the Admins decision. But it is only one they make after the analysis from the Game Mods of course. So reali ...[text shortened]... ed by the Admins, the way I see it.
I am glad I am not the one, having to make those decisions!
Originally posted by Korch100% is an exaggeration. It's ridiculous to demand 100% certainty. Not even trials for murder require 100% certainty, but 'beyond reasonable doubt'.
I think it was pointed out many times - Admins are not banning suspects if they are not for 100% sure. There have been cases when Admins disagreed with opinion of Game Mods.
Originally posted by Very RustyWhy is it so important to you to have the tools and determining factors revealed? The whole system would become useless and NO ONE (with half a brain) would ever be caught again.
absolutely not, and nothing has been explained, there are big parts left out. What are these other tools used for example? That only the chosen few know about, and can't say? Are they tools that could be debated on how fool proof they are?
Lots of question unanswered, but you don't really know, or care , your are just staying on side, like the good yes boy that you are.
P-
Originally posted by PalynkaI don't spend the time in the forums that you do that is for sure!
They're not fool proof, no tool is. I saw the literally hundreds of discussions about this and understand the risks and the benefits of the current system.
There are only two possible reasons why these hundreds of discussions weren't enough for you.
I probably missed many talks on the subject. Lets just leave it at mistakes are possible. I do agree with the benefits, but shame on US ALL, if just one innocent person 'is' or 'was' sent packing. 🙁
Originally posted by Very RustyWhat makes you think that nmdavidb could be innocent?
I don't spend the time in the forums that you do that is for sure!
I probably missed many talks on the subject. Lets just leave it at mistakes are possible. I do agree with the benefits, but shame on US ALL, if just one innocent person 'is' or 'was' sent packing. 🙁
1 edit
Originally posted by PhlabibitThere are those who have the tools and know how they work, does this mean they are more trusted than I am, or the rest of the population of RHP are, I would say the the answer is Yes.
Why is it so important to you to have the tools and determining factors revealed? The whole system would become useless and NO ONE (with half a brain) would ever be caught again.
P-
Lets, just leave it that the system is not Perfect, and mistakes CAN BE MADE, any one ( with half a brain) could also see that.
Which proves my point that "No One" could not say someone was quilty by his analysis alone if the tool that you use is the determining factor?
On the other hand where "No ONe" has a 100% accuracy rate of the ones he did the analysis on, then it appears the tools would not be needed, and "No One's" system he used would be the proper one?
Originally posted by Very RustyNo1 only provides information to the site owner or game mods. It's up to them to evaluate the accuracy, relevance and scope of this information. No1 is just an informer, even if a valuable one (according to himself). His "sentences" are not what is looked at, but the information that he provides with them.
There are those who have the tools and know how they work, does this mean they are more trusted than I am, or the rest of the population of RHP are, I would say the the answer is Yes.
Lets, just leave it that the system is not Perfect, and mistakes CAN BE MADE, any one ( with half a brain) could also see that.
Which proves my point that "No One" cou ...[text shortened]... ars the tools would not be needed, and "No One's" system he used would be the proper one?
1 edit
Originally posted by Very RustyEver use a calculator? Sure, you could punch a wrong number in and get the wrong result.
There are those who have the tools and know how they work, does this mean they are more trusted than I am, or the rest of the population of RHP are, I would say the the answer is Yes.
Lets, just leave it that the system is not Perfect, and mistakes CAN BE MADE, any one ( with half a brain) could also see that.
Which proves my point that "No One" cou ars the tools would not be needed, and "No One's" system he used would be the proper one?
Game moderation is different. The PGN is examined. Where is the chance of error?
The bar is set so high that chances are a cheat will get by... not an honest person being removed from RHP.
Engines check MILLIONS of positions, humans just can't.
Game after game, if the human matches... they are using.
100% sure of every cheat removed. No questions here.
P-
Originally posted by PalynkaFrom my understanding "No One" has a 100% accuracy on his reports!
No1 only provides information to the site owner or game mods. It's up to them to evaluate the accuracy, relevance and scope of this information. No1 is just an informer, even if a valuable one (according to himself). His "sentences" are not what is looked at, but the information that he provides with them.
I would say that is quite an impressive record! Perhaps, he is absolutely correct on his value when it comes to analysis of rather someone is cheating?
Originally posted by Very RustyHe's probably smart enough to not send in names he's not 100% sure about. What's so amazing?
From my understanding "No One" has a 100% accuracy on his reports!
I would say that is quite an impressive record! Perhaps, he is absolutely correct on his value when it comes to analysis of rather someone is cheating?
P-
Originally posted by PalynkaI really don't care if you have had thousands of conversations on the topic, it doesn't mean it is solved, because you say it is!
They're not fool proof, no tool is. I saw the literally hundreds of discussions about this and understand the risks and the benefits of the current system.
There are only two possible reasons why these hundreds of discussions weren't enough for you.
You ASSUME quite a bit Phlabby!