19 Jan 08
I ask this for three reasons.
First, I can't imagine why anyone (aside from a few smart-ass teenagers who just want to feel they've gotten away with something) would cheat on a chess-playing website. There's no prize money at stake, and one can't even gain status here because any status gained would go to a member's screen name, not to the member. In addition, cheating undermines what I presume is the most common reason we're all here: to get better at the game. Simply put, we all know that we can't become better players by letting a piece of software make our moves for us. So where's the motive? I'm sure it happens, but I can't believe it's widespread.
Second, I'm skeptical that cheaters can be caught with any degree of certainty. I'm new here, but I already have plans to analyze every game I finish using a chess engine. If I play on this site for several years, and if I analyze every game with a chess engine, is it not likely that I will start playing like my chess engine? Juries can't convict on anything less than evidence that's beyond a reasonable doubt. Is what we do here so important (or so trivial) that we should use a different standard?
Third, what difference does it make, really, if a few people cheat? Sure, it's annoying. But as I said before, no prizes are at stake except for bragging rights for our anonymous screen names. Should we be banning players from the site for what amounts to a fairly trivial violation, one which can only be alleged but not proven?
19 Jan 08
2 edits
Originally posted by Yuri SumnoffabichWhat difference does it make, really, if RHP bans the few that do? Do you think anyone will miss them when you can download an engine for free off the internet and not have to spend up to two years to finish a game against it? They agreed not to cheat in the TOS box they checked when they joined. If you cheat, you break the TOS you agreed to follow, you get banned. Simple.
Third, what difference does it make, really, if a few people cheat?
If you don't like the TOS go find a site that doesn't have such restrictions.
19 Jan 08
Originally posted by Yuri SumnoffabichActually what you describe would be the situation with no anti-cheating team. Since there'd be no system in place to detect them, there would be an assumption that cheaters, like the Communists, were everywhere. Everyone who played a good game would find themselves smeared in the the public forums and nobody would ever know if whether they were playing a person or Fritz, or Shredder, or Hiarcs. Not the kind of climate the 99% of us here who are honest players would welcome. Thus those of us who don't use engines have nothing to hide and welcome, and are grateful, to the admins who do what they can to keep the place free of cheating scumbags.
This is exactly the kind of witch hunting that banishment will necessarily breed. When allegations are allowed to replace evidence, accusations are considered sufficient. Just ask Joe McCarthy.
Nice try with the McCarthy reference though... what next, Hitler? But I'm guessing you are just warming up.
19 Jan 08
Originally posted by scandiumYou're missing my point. I'm saying that since there's no way to know whether someone is really cheating or not, it's probably not worth the headache of trying to catch cheaters, much less the witch hunt mentality that doing so creates.
If you cheat, you break the TOS you agreed to follow, you get banned. Simple.
If I play here long enough, I'm sure I'll end up getting beaten by someone who's cheating -- and by plenty of people who aren't. The likelihood of my ever discovering it is slim, and the "damage" it does to my rating hardly seems like it's worth the admin's efforts to try to prevent it, much less the hostile environment it creates.
Notice that all it took for me to be accused -- immediately and repeatedly -- of being a cheater is to question the rationale of the banning policy. If I could change my screen name now I'd choose Giles Corey. For those of you who aren't history buffs, Corey was condemned as a witch in Salem because he defended others who had been similarly accused.
19 Jan 08
Originally posted by Yuri SumnoffabichYou're missing the point. Banning 'people' who use engines is simply excluding engines from access to the site. If I wanted to play a computer I'd play my computer. I like the game moderation system as it makes it reasonably certain that I'm actually competing. When I make a good move my opponent is confounded and when they make a good move I know they're truly pleased with themselves.
This is exactly the kind of witch hunting that banishment will necessarily breed. When allegations are allowed to replace evidence, accusations are considered sufficient. Just ask Joe McCarthy.
19 Jan 08
Originally posted by LukerikI agree with your first sentence completely. I guess where we split is on the point of how effectively cheating can be managed. I'll admit here that I don't know much about how engines work. I use Chessmaster 8000, and that's probably laughable to most people who post here. However, it stands to reason that someone on one side of a computer screen cannot know if a person on the other side is cheating just because his or her moves are similar to a computer's.
You're missing the point. Banning 'people' who use engines is simply excluding engines from access to the site. If I wanted to play a computer I'd play my computer. I like the game moderation system as it makes it reasonably certain that I'm actually competing. When I make a good move my opponent is confounded and when they make a good move I know they're truly pleased with themselves.
Maybe what's needed is a vetting process so that site members -- or at least a small portion of them -- can see how a case is built against an alleged cheater. On the other hand, though, I still can't think why it would be worth that much of anyone's time and energy considering that, as I said before, there's nothing tangible at stake here. My name isn't really Yuri Sumnoffabich, and my rating as Yuri will always be pretty meaningless.
19 Jan 08
Originally posted by scandiumThe McCarthy analogy is perfect, thank you very much. Don't need Hitler.
Actually what you describe would be the situation with no anti-cheating team. Since there'd be no system in place to detect them, there would be an assumption that cheaters, like the Communists, were everywhere. Everyone who played a good game would find themselves smeared in the the public forums and nobody would ever know if whether they were playing a pe ...[text shortened]... the McCarthy reference though... what next, Hitler? But I'm guessing you are just warming up.
McCarthy claimed to know who the communists were, but for "security reasons," he couldn't let on how he knew. Since it's impossible to prove you're not a commie, there's no way to defend yourself against the accusation. You can't prove a negative.
Bush claims the NSA is spying only on terrorists, not on good American. But for "security reasons," he can't tell us how he knows. We have to trust him and hope we're never accused of being terrorists. How could we prove that we're not?
The admins of this site claim to have a method of finding cheaters. If they do, that would be great. But as far as I can tell, nobody really knows how it works. So how do you defend yourself if you're accused? You can't.
Maybe we should just enjoy our games here and live secure in the knowledge that in live tournaments, at least, justice still prevails.
19 Jan 08
1 edit
Originally posted by Yuri SumnoffabichThere is a way to know whether someone is really cheating and I doubt you have been here very long because you would know that which hunts don't happen very often here because people get banned from the forums if that make accusations...this first paragraph is all wrong
You're missing my point. I'm saying that since there's no way to know whether someone is really cheating or not, it's probably not worth the headache of trying to catch cheaters, much less the witch hunt mentality that doing so creates.
19 Jan 08
Originally posted by Yuri SumnoffabichYes and maybe the admins who run this site should change a policy that the thousands who play here regularly seem perfectly content with, all to please one player who's just shown up and played one whole game. Or maybe you'd be a whole lot happier if you simply found one of the many sites that don't care if you use engines or not.
The McCarthy analogy is perfect, thank you very much. Don't need Hitler.
McCarthy claimed to know who the communists were, but for "security reasons," he couldn't let on how he knew. Since it's impossible to prove you're not a commie, there's no way to defend yourself against the accusation. You can't prove a negative.
Bush claims the NSA ...[text shortened]... cure in the knowledge that in live tournaments, at least, justice still prevails.
Really, how self-important you must be to show up out of the blue, play one whole game, and then begin insisting that RHP change a fundamental part of the TOS that the thousands who played here agreed to just to suit you and your opinions.
Although whatever, its entertaining enough watching you try and sell a pile of crap and pass it off as platinum while remaining so utterly clueless that nobody here's interested in buying it.