1. Standard memberDragon Fire
    Lord of all beasts
    searching for truth
    Joined
    06 Jun '06
    Moves
    30390
    11 Jul '07 07:27
    Originally posted by leisurelysloth
    I recently played a game against a stronger player in which I followed a book line to a point at which the author said that I had "a decisive attack" but did not say how to carry out the attack--I guess it was supposed to be obvious, but I managed to mess it up and lose. 😳

    Presumably I could purchase a copy of Fritz, plug in this game, and it co ...[text shortened]... in? Also, how do I know that the opening book author did not use Fritz in his/her analysis?
    Not cheating. It is pretty much the same as using Fritz to analyse your past games and keeping that analysis in a DB. That also is not cheating.

    Of course you need to do this before you get to this point in the book and the first time you play the line this is unlikely to be the case.

    Equally useful is analysing those losing book lines and finding an improvement.
  2. Joined
    13 Apr '06
    Moves
    2683
    12 Jul '07 16:03
    Why isn't this topic a sticky?
  3. Standard memberDutch Defense
    Stealer of Souls
    Account suspended
    Joined
    16 Feb '07
    Moves
    119052
    23 Sep '07 02:06
    Originally posted by cludi
    How come players are allowed to play here for years before they get banned?
    1. If no one reports them, they are probably not investigated. The game mods cannot possibly check every single user on the site.
    2. The evidence against them has not been overwhelming enough for a ban. Remember, that we always give the players the benefit of the doubt. As a res ...[text shortened]... ases has been investigated for long periods of time before the evidence was strong enough for a ban.
    People didn't start getting banned until September 1, 2005.
  4. Subscriberno1marauder
    Naturally Right
    At the Bar
    Joined
    22 Jun '04
    Moves
    42420
    23 Sep '07 06:48
    Originally posted by Dutch Defense
    People didn't start getting banned until September 1, 2005.
    This is not true; players were banned before the existence of the list of banned players.
  5. Standard memberArrakis
    D_U_N_E
    Account suspended
    Joined
    01 May '04
    Moves
    64653
    24 Sep '07 04:591 edit
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    This is not true; players were banned before the existence of the list of banned players.
    Hi marauder! 🙂
    I'm glad to see you check in every once in awhile. Although I, like yourself, have removed my presense from the main drag.

    Cheers,
    Arrakis
  6. Standard memberwormwood
    If Theres Hell Below
    We're All Gonna Go!
    Joined
    10 Sep '05
    Moves
    10228
    17 Jan '08 11:44
    looks like it's time for a bump.
  7. Joined
    03 Feb '04
    Moves
    77968
    17 Jan '08 13:30
    Please, guys, can we make this thread a sticky!!!!!!!!!!!
  8. lookin for a way out
    Joined
    12 Dec '06
    Moves
    4087
    05 Mar '08 12:293 edits
    Originally posted by cludi

    Do banned players get a chance to defend themselves?
    No.
    The game mods present the evidence to the site admins who then decide whether to ban or not.
    Some people have compared the banning of players to a case in the court of law where the accused are allowed to defend themselves. This is, however, quite a different situation for at least 2 reasons:
    ng this a place for people to play without an engine helping or deciding their next move......[/b]
    Bump ..... 🙂

    EDIT: the quote has been edited quite a bit, but I'm sure you get the drift and can find the original up there ^ !

    EDIT 2: Unless it's been removed.
  9. THORNINYOURSIDE
    Joined
    04 Sep '04
    Moves
    245624
    05 Mar '08 12:331 edit
    Originally posted by Pawn Qween
    Bump ..... 🙂

    EDIT: the quote has been edited quite a bit, but I'm sure you get the drift and can find the original up there ^ !
    😲

    Edit : Rather than modding every post I make just give me a forum ban which will save me the hassle of posting.
  10. Subscribershortcircuit
    master of disaster
    funny farm
    Joined
    28 Jan '07
    Moves
    87417
    05 Mar '08 16:35
    Originally posted by Kepler
    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.
    I think you are incorrect in your statement here. You comment should be toned down a bit due to the following.

    Your comment is only true to a point. The players (buyer) purchases a product (chess games at RHP) for an agreed price (fee). There is a problem called implied merchantibility that you deal with that basically says, the seller (RHP) must provide the goods or service as advertised (within reason) or they are guilty of committing a tort against the buyer (us). There are terms of agreement that both parties agree to be bound by at the time of the purchase. The topic of cheating is in that agreement as well as the proposed penalty of permanent expulsion from the site. If the party is guilty of cheating, RHP is well within its rights to ban the player(s) in question. However, if RHP were to ban an innocent player, that player would be entitled to, at minimum, a refund of the proportionate share of the annual fee that was unused or unuseable.

    I believe that this is the reason that such due diligence must be employed with as much supporting eveidence as practical to keep matters out of the courts (obviously small claims court).
  11. Donationmurrow
    penguinpuffin
    finsbury
    Joined
    25 Aug '04
    Moves
    48501
    05 Mar '08 16:44
    Originally posted by shortcircuit
    I think you are incorrect in your statement here. You comment should be toned down a bit due to the following.

    Your comment is only true to a point. The players (buyer) purchases a product (chess games at RHP) for an agreed price (fee). There is a problem called implied merchantibility that you deal with that basically says, the seller (RHP) must pro ...[text shortened]... porting eveidence as practical to keep matters out of the courts (obviously small claims court).
    Are you trying to talk "legal"?

    If so, I'm afraid your post doesn't make any sense.

    Where it does make some sense, it's completely wrong.


    p.s. Tort has nothing to do with this.
  12. Standard membercaissad4
    Child of the Novelty
    San Antonio, Texas
    Joined
    08 Mar '04
    Moves
    618425
    06 Mar '08 06:141 edit
    Originally posted by cludi
    I've noticed that everytime one or more users are banned a new thread is started in this forum to discuss the "new" cheaters. I've also noticed that only a few posts into these threads, the same questions inevitably pop up:

    How do we know they're cheating?
    Do they get a chance to defend themselves? etc etc.

    For future reference, please allow me to an ce for people to play without an engine helping or deciding their next move......
    Are there any reasons why a player should be exempt from this rule ?
    It is surely universally applied.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree