Evidence of cheating

We are forming a problem here. After a player is banned, it turns into a fight between those who "know" the player and insist that they did not cheat, versus those that believe in the system.

I think that the evidence should be made available, including the conclusion drawn. Right now, a player denies it, and if that player doesn't always use an engine, or uses a poor one, then they are believed.

If you read this and don't feel the information should be presented, not necessarily in the forums, then say why it should be kept private. Posted evidence is the only way for people to either realize that things are fair, or to see if a mistake has been made.

See Terms of Service, article 13

Originally posted by saffa73
See Terms of Service, article 13

Bravo.

Originally posted by Pie1120
We are forming a problem here. After a player is banned, it turns into a fight between those who "know" the player and insist that they did not cheat, versus those that believe in the system.

I think that the evidence should be made available, including the conclusion drawn. Right now, a player denies it, and if that player doesn't always use an engi ...[text shortened]... nly way for people to either realize that things are fair, or to see if a mistake has been made.

In short, if the evidence is presented, either in the forums or privately to the accused party, this information will be passed on one way or another to the community at large and undermine the game moderators' ability to catch cheaters.

Originally posted by bbarr
In short, if the evidence is presented, either in the forums or privately to the accused party, this information will be passed on one way or another to the community at large and undermine the game moderators' ability to catch cheaters.

Sir, this is a non sequitur. The only reason it appears to be true is one of the very things that indicates a flaw in the system: the absence of an evidentiary standard of a broken rule.

Does America's criminal justice system of public trials with a standard of due process undermine police and prosecutorial efficacy?

To the extent that it does, don't you value such standards and accountability of those in power to the community above whatever marginally deleterious effects they have on the system's ability to reduce crime?

The Game Mods play the role of prosecutor and jury. Wouldn't it be more in the interest of justice to have them play the prosecutorial role only? Are you in favor of eliminating jury trials from America's criminal due process? Are you willing to just trust that if prosecutors are convinced beyond a resonable doubt then the accused is in fact guilty? Should those in charge of proving something also be in charge of deciding when they have met their burden of proof? That is exactly the system of "justice" in place here. It was also prevalent in Communist Russia.

Finally, surely you realize that there are numerous trivial algorithms for cheating with engines and avoiding detection. Anybody who wants to can do it and get away with it. (If they can't figure one out themselves, I'll be happy to tell them how.) It's not like there are secret cheating methods that only the game mods and the banned cheaters know or can figure out, and that other opportunists would take up when they are disclosed. I mean, seriously, do you honestly think there are players who don't cheat now for want of a safe method, but might start cheating when they learn of a safe method AND that revealing Game Mod evidence would illuminate such a method?

This secrecy isn't stopping anybody from beating the system. It's serving only as a barrier to inter-caste trust.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Sir, this is a non sequitur. The only reason it appears to be true is one of the very things that indicates a flaw in the system: the absence of an evidentiary standard of a broken rule.

Does America's criminal justice system of [b]public trials with a standard of due process undermine police and prosecutorial efficacy?

To the ...[text shortened]... stopping anybody from beating the system. It's serving only as a barrier to inter-caste trust.[/b]

No, this is not a non-sequitur, and it appears true because it is true. There is no lack here of an evidentiary standard; I'm sure the game mods have theirs. What you want is access to that evidentiary standard. But granting you or others access would undermine game mods' ability to gather evidence in the future. Lamentable, but hardly constitutive of a broken system.

Yes, sometimes.

Yes.

Yes, but justice is not the only consideration at issue. This community values both justice and the purging of cheats.

No, but I would prefer a small, highly capable jury rather then one drawn from the population at large. I certainly wouldn't want the community here to serve as a jury for cheating accusations, for the obvious reasons.

No, but unlike prosecuters, the job of game mods is not to convict. The job of game mods is to assess the evidence, like judges.

The game mods are not in charge of proving anything, they are in charge of assessing whether the accusations they receive from others hold water, it can take months for them to make their determination, and they act only on consensus. That hardly sounds like Communist Russia to me.

No, I think there are cheaters who think they have a safe method, and are incorrect, and if told how they were detected would return under a different nick and/or tell others about the tools used in their detection.

Originally posted by bbarr
There is no lack here of an evidentiary standard; I'm sure the game mods have theirs.

You are sounding just like the "I support the Mods 100%" crew from the Times of Trouble.

A standard cannot be secret. A standard is something that all intereseted parties can objectively apply. I have an interest in knowing that my fellow community members were ejected according to such a standard, but if the standard is not available for my examination, it is not a standard at all.

If you buy a pound of cheese, don't you expect it to be weighed in front of you on a scale? Would you trust the clerk to weight it in back, even though he is using a standard, if you can't examine it to make sure that he is applying it correctly? The only way you could verify the correct sale is to take it home and weigh it on a scale of your own - but then the standard is once again being shared and is no longer secret. In the system you support, the store can use any old skewed or rigged scale, because it is their own personal standard, and you'd forbid anybody but the store from owning a scale to verify the accurarcy of the weight of the cheese.

Do you think, based on anything other than the Game Mods' proclamation, that Exy was a cheater? If the Game Mods had found that Exy wasn't a cheater, would you then believe that he wasn't? Will you accept any decision they make as correct? If they were to find that you are a cheater, would you believe them? What sort of epistemology is this?

Originally posted by saffa73
See Terms of Service, article 13

I don't see how that applies. I'm not suggesting the Terminations not be made. I'm saying that the evidence of cheating be published so that the remaining community doesn't get into a fight over the termination. This suggestion isn't about what is right or what can be done, it is about improving the morale of the community.

The evidence is said to be overwhelming and decisive. Then share it so people can go, "Yeah, good call." and move on without fighting and bickering for days on end. Well, that will always happen, but those cantakerous few won't drag the rest of the community with them.

Whether evidence is released or not is up to the Site Admins.

But if they did choose to release the evidence I would immediately resign as a Game Mod and go play my chess somewhere else where I'd have a much better chance of playing human opponents.

Can you just imagine the various thought processes going on while poring over the published evidence: "Sheesh, I better stop doing that... Hmmm, I'm going to have to avoid those.... My God! They know about that trick!... Ahhh, so that's the benchmark they use... Damn! Something else I'll have to rethink.... Okay! I better find another way to disguise that.... etc etc etc....."

I have no interest in spending huge amounts of my spare time on an activity where the only tangible outcome is the enlightenment, education and propogation of a much smarter, virtually undetectable, class of cheat. No thank you!

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Whether evidence is released or not is up to the Site Admins.

But if they did choose to release the evidence I would immediately resign as a Game Mod and go play my chess somewhere else where I'd have a much better chance of playing human opponents.

Can you just imagine the various thought processes going on while poring over the published eviden ...[text shortened]... ucation and propogation of a much smarter, virtually undetectable, class of cheat. No thank you!

Thank you, Chicken Little.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Thank you, Chicken Little.

Lo, he is risen! What say you in the matter of Exy?

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
Lo, he is risen! What say you in the matter of Exy?

I have already weighed in: http://www.timeforchess.com/board/showthread.php?threadid=31233&page=3 halfway down the page.

Not only is the evidence not presented, but the specific charge isn't either. It is like being arrested and charged for Robbery, but the authorities convicting you without ever saying who you robbed and when. Since it's absolutely clear that Exy didn't use an engine in the vast majority of his games (he even had 500+ losses), you would think the Game Mods would at least state what games he did cheat in and preferably tell us what engine thay believe he used. That way their findings could be independently verified. But nothing is presented at all. The system is a similar one to that presented in Kafka's The Trial except not as well-written.

Originally posted by no1marauder
The system is a similar one to that presented in Kafka's The Trial except not as well-written.

Very well said. I urge you to come back and help us fight this battle. With bbarr on the side of the regime, we need all the help we can get.

Originally posted by DoctorScribbles
You are sounding just like the "I support the Mods 100%" crew from the Times of Trouble.

A standard cannot be secret. A standard is something that all intereseted parties can objectively apply. I have an interest in knowing that my fellow community members were ejected according to such a standard, but if the standard is not available for my e ...[text shortened]... find that you are a cheater, would you believe them? What sort of epistemology is this?

No, I'm not saying the game mods are infallible, or ought to be supported regardless of what they do. I'm merely saying they have an evidentiary standard and good reasons for keeping quiet concerning the tools they use to gather evidence.

Of course a standard can be a secret. It can be a secret from those not meant or authorized to apply it. Your interest in knowing the evidentiary standard is understandable, but the reason it provides is defeasible, and outweighed by the interest of the site administrators and game moderators and others in the RHP community who want the effective policing of engine users.

Yes.

Maybe, depends on the clerk.

I know that the game mods thought there was overwhelming evidence that he cheated, collected over a long period of time, and that there was consensus amongst them. I also have been playing and chatting with David Tebb for over three years now, and I trust his judgment. I think this provides a good, prima facie reason to believe that Exy cheated. Of course I don't know this with certainty, but certainty isn't the proper epistemic standard here. This is epistemology that deals with rational belief formation based on testimony.

Originally posted by bbarr
No, I'm not saying the game mods are infallible, or ought to be supported regardless of what they do. I'm merely saying they have an evidentiary standard and good reasons for keeping quiet concerning the tools they use to gather evidence.

Of course a standard can be a secret. It can be a secret from those not meant or authorized to apply it. Your int ...[text shortened]... andard here. This is epistemology that deals with rational belief formation based on testimony.

Are you saying merely because you believe the specific individuals involved are generally trustworthy that their findings are prima facie entitled to belief even if the available public evidence supports a contrary conclusion? If Dave Tebb told you he had been abducted by aliens would you feel his word entitled to belief until it was conclusively proven wrong?

Exy had many losses and the engine analysis of games I played with him shows no evidence whatsoever of cheating. Unlike the Game Mods, I would show that analysis to anyone interested. He also had a huge number of losses and no large rating spikes as are indicative of the cheaters already named. Given this evidence, plus your own games with Exy, why are you willing to accept as true unspecified allegations that are contrary to what you know are facts? Should the present legal system in the US be replaced with a system whereby a trusted police officer can say you are guilty of Robbery, but never say when and where you robbed someone and that "evidence" be sufficient for punishment?