04 Jul '07 21:53>
The post that was quoted here has been removedlikewise.
It doesn't even prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. All statistical analysis can do is provide evidence at a certain level of confidence (which needs to be stated) for a particular hypothesis.And when the level of confidence can be accurately described as being "beyond reasonable doubt" the player is banned. Simple.
Originally posted by MahoutExactly, and no one needs to justify it. This is not a court of law, it is a business and the proprietors can allow or disallow use of the facilities as and when they please.
And when the level of confidence can be accurately described as being "beyond reasonable doubt" the player is banned. Simple.
Originally posted by lepomisThey should start an online chess site association so that if a cheater is banned from one site, the information is passed on to all member sites who can then also ban them. Right now, cheats get banned and simply move to another site and continue.
He is also found here. http://www.correspondencechess.com/marconi/can.ger.htm
and many other sites... if that is his real name.
Originally posted by KeplerBy describing the site as a business do you mean to exclude the possibility that those who own and run the site might do so for reasons other than pure profit. You seem to imply that financial gain is the only motivating factor for the creation and running of this site. Is it not also possible that they are driven by a passion for chess and the technology that makes it all work. Maybe their primary goal is to create the best possible site for the community and they work tirelessly to achieve this with profit being a less important but necessary consideration. And what of the work put in by the unpaid moderators.
Exactly, and no one needs to justify it. This is not a court of law, it is a business and the proprietors can allow or disallow use of the facilities as and when they please.
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveBut wouldn't that only prevent the cheats who wish to keep the same email and online identity. I don't know if it's possible to stop someone signing up again with a new email and new user name.
They should start an online chess site association so that if a cheater is banned from one site, the information is passed on to all member sites who can then also ban them. Right now, cheats get banned and simply move to another site and continue.
This idea would mean that all the other sites would have to investigate their own suspects too as part of the joining conditions. Which is one thing that they appear not to do at some sites.
Originally posted by MahoutI do not exclude any reason for running this site. I worked for many years for a man who ran his business as a non-profit organisation. In the UK this brings tax benefits, no profit means the company does not pay taxes. He also continued to run the business to give himself something to do after his wife had died, in effect it was his social club. This did not in any way change the simple fact that he was not obliged to do business with anyone if he did not want to and he had no need to provide a reason for same.
By describing the site as a business do you mean to exclude the possibility that those who own and run the site might do so for reasons other than pure profit. You seem to imply that financial gain is the only motivating factor for the creation and running of this site. Is it not also possible that they are driven by a passion for chess and the technology th ...[text shortened]... s of the site but it seems inevitable that not everyone will be happy with how this is achieved.
Originally posted by Dr StrangeloveI'd love to see an online chess governing body too. If you wanted to run a chess site then you would need to be affiliated to this body. Also, if you wished to play on an online chess site, you would have to be a member of the body too. This ( individual membership ) would require full first and surnames, proof of address and ID. They would then issue you with a unique membership number which you could use to join online sites. You get caught cheating on one, your membership of the governing body is withdrawn and you can never play online again.
They should start an online chess site association so that if a cheater is banned from one site, the information is passed on to all member sites who can then also ban them. Right now, cheats get banned and simply move to another site and continue.
This idea would mean that all the other sites would have to investigate their own suspects too as part of the joining conditions. Which is one thing that they appear not to do at some sites.
Originally posted by saffa73what an utterly useless idea. the main advantage of playing online is the easiness of it all. you just create a handle and you're set to go. almost nobody would bother to play on such totalitarian sites, when there's far easier choices which don't require you to sign a contract in blood.
I'd love to see an online chess governing body too. If you wanted to run a chess site then you would need to be affiliated to this body. Also, if you wished to play on an online chess site, you would have to be a member of the body too. This ( individual membership ) would require full first and surnames, proof of address and ID. They would then issue you wi ...[text shortened]... body is withdrawn and you can never play online again.
Sound good? Difficult to implement?
Originally posted by wormwoodAn utterly useless idea? At least it would minimise the risk of encountering cheats who frequent sites where it's easy to just get a handle and play!!!
what an utterly useless idea. the main advantage of playing online is the easiness of it all. you just create a handle and you're set to go. almost nobody would bother to play on such totalitarian sites, when there's far easier choices which don't require you to sign a contract in blood.
Originally posted by MahoutA fair reposte. I think many of us are also grateful for Cludi's very helpful exposition of the issues involved. My only concern would be with on what the statistics were based.
And when the level of confidence can be accurately described as being "beyond reasonable doubt" the player is banned. Simple.
Originally posted by Northern LadI have had the same thoughts but with a limited knowledge of engines and at my current level of chess it is over my head - I just assume that the mods have a method they are confident with. It could be that the argument you present is the reason there are cheats who don't get caught - I can't bring myself to spell out the details.
A fair reposte. I think many of us are also grateful for Cludi's very helpful exposition of the issues involved. My only concern would be with on what the statistics were based.
I'm not at all an expert on chess engines, but I do recall a few years ago having two engines (earlier versions of Fritz and Hiarcs) at my disposal for a while. I was struck b ...[text shortened]... , and I should imagine very controversial, to label anyone a cheat on such a basis alone.