Originally posted by arrakisMy rating here is in the 1400's now, and that's not too bad for playing social chess, moderating forums, and trying to do the chess players at this site a service by helping with game moderators. I could easily be 16 to 18 hundred if I were to put as much time into my game as I have put into this site.
WHOA! Exy was NEVER an 1100 player! Phlabibit made that ridiculous claim. But from what I've seen about Phlabibit, he plays 1400 level chess, doesn't know his butt from a hole in the ground, and is more concerned about serving his political agenda. ðŸ˜
Also, I stand corrected. Exy was Sub 1100. Here is a little image of Exy's graph for you to chew on... back from when he first came to the site. More proof that you have and never will have any idea what you are talking about.
http://www.rhp15.com/pictures/Exy.jpg
(this image is not faked, and Russ... Chrismo... any game mod, or any RHP player who's been here as long as I have or longer can attest to.)
What the heck would my agenda be to get Exy removed from this site? Nothing more than trying to get cheaters off of RHP for the people who were tired of playing cheats.
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitIs that a player had a 1082 rating more than two years ago considered conclusive proof that he used an engine since then?
My rating here is in the 1400's now, and that's not too bad for playing social chess, moderating forums, and trying to do the chess players at this site a service by helping with game moderators. I could easily be 16 to 18 hundred if I were to put as much time into my game as I have put into this site.
Also, I stand corrected. Exy was Sub 1100. Her ...[text shortened]... re than trying to get cheaters off of RHP for the people who were tired of playing cheats.
P-
Originally posted by no1marauderNo, it only proves that Arrakis is wrong. That's all that post is for. Just cuz I say something doesn't mean it is proof Exy did or did not cheat.
Is that a player had a 1082 rating more than two years ago considered conclusive proof that he used an engine since then?
Quit trying to spin everything I say. Did you even read the post I replied to?
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitMight wanna look at the title of the thread you're posting in.
No, it only proves that Arrakis is wrong. That's all that post is for. Just cuz I say something doesn't mean it is proof Exy did or did not cheat.
Quit trying to spin everything I say. Did you even read the post I replied to?
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitArrakis says a lot of dumb s**t and I don't endorse his conspiracy theories or personal shots at any Game Mods. But the question remains: Was the fact that Exy was a low rated player more than two years ago used as probative evidence that he was using an engine since then? If not, why did you bring it up at all?
Why? Akarris made a bold statement about Exy that was wrong, and tried to make me look wrong.
P-
Originally posted by no1marauderIt was not part of any evidence, and perhaps he's a better player now... but he's certainly not a 2000 rated player.
Arrakis says a lot of dumb s**t and I don't endorse his conspiracy theories or personal shots at any Game Mods. But the question remains: Was the fact that Exy was a low rated player more than two years ago used as probative evidence that he was using an engine since then? If not, why did you bring it up at all?
That was his last known rating before he turned his engine on, and it came up in conversation. It is also a reason why Russ doesn't want any game mod saying anything about our decisions... anything we say will never be enough, and there will always be supporters of cheaters that will try to twist what we say.
P-
Originally posted by PhlabibitThat a few people would never accept any amount of evidence as proof of certain cheater's guilt is a poor reason not to give out any information to most of us who are open to the idea that there are engine users on the site. You get the same arguments now, but the debate is ill-informed and causes anxiety among honest players and gives pseudo-credibility to some of the "conspiracy" theories that float around. I continue to hope that the Site Admins will reconsider this policy of extreme secrecy and at least make public the specific conclusions and any game analyses used in the determinations. Until they do, the policy will continue to seem arbitrary and open to abuse.
It was not part of any evidence, and perhaps he's a better player now... but he's certainly not a 2000 rated player.
That was his last known rating before he turned his engine on, and it came up in conversation. It is also a reason why Russ doesn't want any game mod saying anything about our decisions... anything we say will never be enough, and there will always be supporters of cheaters that will try to twist what we say.
P-
He's probably laughing his bollox off about all the fuss he's caused here.
No one should support a cheater and no-one should expect the details to be publicised. In olympics drug tests, the only way they catch the cheats is by keeping one step ahead of them technology-wize. Would you expect them to tell everyone their methods, because they don't.
[16]
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveA poor analogy; they do reveal what drug the person used and when the test was given. They even allow the accused to have an independent lab confirm the test results. That is all that is being asked here.
He's probably laughing his bollox off about all the fuss he's caused here.
No one should support a cheater and no-one should expect the details to be publicised. In olympics drug tests, the only way they catch the cheats is by keeping one step ahead of them technology-wize. Would you expect them to tell everyone their methods, because they don't.
[16]
Originally posted by arrakisDid your parents drop you on your head when you were a baby?
WHOA! Exy was NEVER an 1100 player! Phlabibit made that ridiculous claim. But from what I've seen about Phlabibit, he plays 1400 level chess, doesn't know his butt from a hole in the ground, and is more concerned about serving his political agenda. ðŸ˜
A lot has been discussed on this thread and many personal accusations have been launched, some more directly than others. I urge anyone posting to think before making such personal attacks. I also urge any thread spammers to keep out unless they have anything constructive to add to the arguements being presented.
When I started this thread I intended it be a place to discus the evidence both for and against Exy being banned. There is still much that is unknown about the events leading up to Exy being accused and during the time he was under investigation. And where I do not expect the Mods to revealed all their evidence I do side with those players who would like to see specifics mentioned when other players are banned.
The Mods should look at the issues caused by decisions taken in closed courts. The most prevalent problem is that any decision made behind closed doors will only serve to fuel speculation and encourage rumours and bad feelings to spread. I personally apologise to any Mods for pouring fuel onto these fires, but it is going to happen every time a player of Exy or IronMan's status is banned. People are going to pashionately support both sides unless there is a well present case against the player.
Many have stated - "so what" - let Exy go and lets all get back to playing chess. But there is always the next time, and I for one would like to see the forums free of these kinds of threads in the future. We should be discussing chess not the banning of players. The reason we discus the banning of players is because it is contraversial and when no clear proof of cheating is presented by the Mods we have to wonder if there was some other motivation for the player to be banned - unfortunately in this case people stood to gain by Exy being banned so we have to explore those arguements and as we have no where else to discus them they are discussed here.
Another negative aspect of keeping evidence secret is that legitimately good players are always going to be under suspicion of cheating. This will degrade the players' reputation and once more fuel bad feelings.
These are all negative aspects of the closed court decision making process.
On the other hand making the evidence clear to the public may allow other cheating players an incite into what causes a player to be banned for cheating. As has been mentioned many times it may simply allow cheats to cheat in more ingeneous ways. I can understand that it is a tough job, and I deeply respect the Mods for giving it try, but listen to the community and let them guide you in making the right decision about "How" a player should be banned. Many fair players take pride in that they are good and don't need a game engine to be good and are deeply wounded when false accusation are made.
Lets be nice to each other.
Originally posted by no1marauderNo1,
It is, of course, not primarily about Exy but about what constitutes proof of engine use here. My game analyses and other factors show no evidence of engine use by Exy, so if Exy can be banned for cheating on the mere say so of the Game Mods, then anybody can be. One might say (and I'm sure some will) "It's Russ site etc etc etc" but as one of the on ...[text shortened]... of losses, is banned. One doesn't have to question their motives to question their competence.
Now let me just throw this out there. What “if” the game mods did decide to show you the games that they took into consideration? Have you not given any attention to what has happened in the past when games are analyzed? Not one of you hunyuks can seem to agree on how many match ups constitute cheating in how many games! When it comes down to cheating using a chess engine, unless the person is using the chess engine for every move, with the exact computer set up and program you have, it is debatable. You don’t know what computers the game mods have; you don’t know what engines they use. I have found that different computers give out different answers because of the size/speed of its chip or chips, or number of programs running in the background. Just because “your” computer has chess engine on it does not mean that it calculates the move correctly or the same as any other machine, if that is your logic it is somewhat wanting and illogical. Have you never looked at the computer against computer tournaments that are held? How can there be any winner? Wouldn’t every game end in a draw?
RTh
Originally posted by RingtailhunterI agree wholeheartedly.
When it comes down to cheating using a chess engine, unless the person is using the chess engine for every move, with the exact computer set up and program you have, it is debatable.
That is why we need something to be announced by the mods as Exy wasn't a cheater using the chess engine for every move.
Thanks for summing up the point of the people wanting some kind of statement from the game mods so succinctly, Rapalla.
D