- Joined
- 18 Jan 07
- Moves
- 12477
Originally posted by VarenkaWhy, yes. It's usually the people who methinks do protest too much. You and kopalov, take note - you're making yourself suspect for the very same reason I no longer take anything skeeter says at face value.
Excuse the pun, but do you really think everything is so black or white? No shades of grey?
You must have come across people that you think are "dodgy".
Richard
Originally posted by greenpawn34well, it's a naive idea based on the belief that 'known people don't cheat'. which is obviously wishfull thinking at best. it doesn't really address cheating in any way.
I think my suggestion years ago that everyone must reveal their true selves
in a PM to the Mods once they go over 2000 or 2100 would go a long way
to restoring faith. But it got few supporters.
we have a VERY good quantifiable way to identify cheats already, THAT is not the problem. the problem is the cheats don't get booted, for reasons we can only guess. the page #1 is an insult to the hundreds & thousands of hours the game mod(s) has put into identifying cheats. how long was weyerstrass here after being found out, something like 5 years? and that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Hi WW.
It was naive. The idea being would a known player like the idea of being
banned from a website. Also if an OTB 1350 player who has been playing
for 6 months apeared over 2200 on the front page it may raise a few eyebrows.
What was going behind closed doors I've no idea.
I defended the long delay in banning big Ron because they had nothing like
that to go on before. Here was a genuine 100% known good player.
A world contender in C.C. play.
You had to look at both sides. A possible lawsuit could have followed.
Originally posted by greenpawn34it doesn't matter what 'ronald' did before, being a legitimate player in the past doesn't give ANY excuse for cheating. you cheat, you get the boot. it's as simple as that.
Hi WW.
It was naive. The idea being would a known player like the idea of being
banned from a website. Also if an OTB 1350 player who has been playing
for 6 months apeared over 2200 on the front page it may raise a few eyebrows.
What was going behind closed doors I've no idea.
I defended the long delay in banning big Ron because they had noth ...[text shortened]... tender in C.C. play.
You had to look at both sides. A possible lawsuit could have followed.
the TOS also clearly states rhp reserves the right to termination in any possible scenario:
13. TERMINATION
You agree that RHP may, under certain circumstances and without prior notice, immediately terminate your RHP account,and access to the Service. Cause for such termination shall include, but not be limited to, (a) breaches or violations of the TOS or other incorporated agreements or guidelines, (b) requests by law enforcement or other government agencies, (c) a request by you (self-initiated account deletions), (d) discontinuance or material modification to the Service (or any part thereof), (e) unexpected technical or security issues or problems, and (f) extended periods of inactivity. Termination of your RHP account includes (a) removal of access to all offerings within the Service, (b) deletion of your password and all related information and content associated with or inside your account (or any part thereof), and (c) barring further use of the Service. Further, you agree that all terminations for cause shall be made in RHP's sole discretion and that RHP shall not be liable to you or any third-party for any termination of your account, any associated email address, or access to the Service.
there's very little room for wiggling there. rhp has covered their asses pretty well.
Originally posted by Shallow BlueDon't be so ridiculous. How could anyone suspect a non-sub who's been here 3 months and is 27-0 and very vociferous in the forums about engine abuse ?
Why, yes. It's usually the people who methinks do protest too much. You and kopalov, take note - you're making yourself suspect for the very same reason I no longer take anything skeeter says at face value.
Richard
Originally posted by wormwoodin 99% of the cases i agree with you. the world is full enough of pseudo-legitimated personalities that stay in power/office/whatever just because of what they seem to have achieved before. is like the murderer of his family who always has been 'such a good person', 'such a nice father'...
it doesn't matter what 'ronald' did before, being a legitimate player in the past doesn't give ANY excuse for cheating. you cheat, you get the boot. it's as simple as that.
but then, such a "great person" does the most evil things, suddenly. unexpectedly. like noone ever imagined someting like that to happen.
well...that is the exact same argument that held true for weyerstrass. the matchup system is based on the matchup rates of all previous/current gm's. who would claim to know for sure, even when a superhigh matchup rate was found, that this person might not be an exception to the rule?
suddenly you find yourself at the level of balancing risk vs reward... his reputation was in the pot. quite strong actually.
and that is the most amazing thing about the weyerstrass story - the cheating even though he was such a great player - the reward was tending towards 0....
edit: reward as in 'being number one on a cc site and being always accused of cheating and having to be rude to people' 😉
Originally posted by kopatovThe mods can catch people but the admins have to give them the boot.
Make up your mind GP. You claim that the [b]"mods are good x2", then you stated "Of course if you are interested in compuer v computer games then go to the
front page of the players table and........ "
Early on in this thread you launched a bizarre defence even claiming that a database of saved box analysis is valid under the TOS.
I would have presumed there would be some "method" in all this "staggering" around.[/b]
Hi WW
"it doesn't matter what 'ronald' did before, being a legitimate player in the past
doesn't give ANY excuse for cheating. you cheat, you get the boot. it's as simple
as that. "
Totally agree 100%.
And I agreed 100% with the banning, the evidence I saw was overwhelming.
(but there are those on here who still think he should not have gone.)
I remember posting years ago something like they are either going to ban Big Ron
or have to invite back every player they have banned.
And I have to remind you we still do not know why Big Ron was banned.
But it's good to speculate.
The match up system is perfect for catching the clowns.
But there was no precedent for someone of big Ron's class.
He was C.C. IM a long time before computers got good. The pedigree was there.
In 1990 he became CC champion of the Netherlands. He also played
in the 15th world championship CC and finished sixth!
Had a national CC Champion, World title contener ever been
banned before using the match up system? NO!
The mods advise a player is banned but it is up to the site owners.
They had a few others things to consider of before making such a decision.
So you can understand the hand wringing and the dithering.
Give them a break on this one. It was an exceptional case.
In the end IMO they got it right. And IMO they did the correct thing in
wanting more proof. They had to be 100% sure.
If they were going to get one wrong it would have been this one.
A failure would have undermined the system.
(much in the same way as people who claim the Mods are no good are
attempting to do. You have to ask yourself why?)
It may have abolished the system. What then?
And the more people moaned about him staying
(How many 'Big Ron must go' threads were pulled?...dozens.)
The longer they had to let him stay.
They could not be seen bowing to forum pressure.
Then the lunatics would be running the asylum.
When the ban did come it came out of the blue and was totally unexpected.
TOS seems to cover everything quite well. Although my no1 fan Kopatov thinks
I'm a lawyer, I'm not. (Just a winder upper.) There might be a loophole in there.
The opening statement.
"RHP provides its service to you, subject to the following Terms of Service
( "TOS" ), which may be updated by us from time to time without notice to you.
Can anyone remember what TOS said re bannings before the Big Ron episode.
was it the same or was it re-worded slightly (without telling us).
Would not be surprised to hear a wee bit of re-jigging went on before Big Ron
finally went.
I went searching for old TOS posts in threads but did not find anything.
I did however stumble upon this.
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Red_Hot_Pawn
Engine Use
It is highly illegal NOT to use an engine for assistance at RHP. failure to comply
(98% matchup) will result in an instant ban.
That is is what it actually says.
So anyone not using a box is to be banned.
Looks like it will be just the front page left. 😉
(Joke.... it's a joke Kopatov....a joke....A J.O.K.E. Google 'Joke' you will get the idea)
I think it is has been updated fairly recently because:
Web Browsers at RHP States.
Anything, except a wheelbarrow.
A reworking of an old joke.....
-------------------------------------
GreenPawn, Kopatov and Skeeter are sitting in a bar. GreenPawn turns to Kopatov and asks:
GreenPawn: Koppy, what are you asprirations on RHP for the upcoming year ?
Kopatov: I'd like one person in the forums at RHP to believe I'm not a returning banned player out to cause trouble.
GreenPawn: Interesting, Skeets, what are your aspirations ?
Skeeter: I'd like to win the 2012 RHP Championship, get my game score against DT to 7-6, smash up a few engines in some tournaments and get my "site idea" for all non-subs to be banned implemented.
GreenPawn: Don't you think that's a bit far fetched ?
Skeeter: Well he started it.
----------------------------------
And yes.. I do think I'm funny..
Originally posted by greenpawn34no it wasn't. it took YEARS to ban him after being reported by the game mods. YEARS!
Give them a break on this one. It was an exceptional case.
and it didn't happen until huge public pressure in the forums, loads of people getting silenced and resigning their subscriptions in protest. it was unacceptable.
Originally posted by greenpawn342009?? I don't think that's even close. as I remember he was one of the first reported cheaters, back from something like 5 years ago already.
"no it wasn't. it took YEARS to ban him after being reported by the game mods. YEARS!
22 months. (harldy years!)
The mods rec'd he be banned Jan 2009 - he was banned Oct 2010.
Agree is was still too long. Upon reflection can see why it took so long.
back when I was new here and naive, I thought W must be legit, as SURELY he would've been analyzed, found guilty and kicked years ago. I remember no1 telling me I didn't know what I was talking about. it turned out he was right, as I later heard that big W had indeed been reported ages ago. the admins just didn't act on it.
in fact, I can't remember no1 ever being wrong about any of them, pretty much everybody he's pointed out have been later kicked. a couple of them still left to go, again from years back already.