21 Nov 04
Originally posted by FeivelYou're entitled to your opinion, fair enough.
Just a thought here. Doesn't making it a prominent issue tend to increase the problem?
Feivel
<Hypothetical real life situation>... theft is illegal. You live in a city of 5000, where there are people committing theft on a daily basis. The law enforcers don't enforce the law, because they are afraid that if they admit there is a problem with theft in their city, then people will be afraid to move to that city.
Some people are unhappy at being robbed on a daily basis, so they decide to get enough evidence together so that the law enforcers will be forced to act. They gather photos of the people committing thefts, they match fingerprints to known theives. They get the thieves accounts showing that their standard of living has gone from squalor to majesty in a couple of short months.
Other people who are also robbed on a daily basis and some who have not yet been robbed think that the 'vigilantes' should keep quiet, because by highlighting the problem, they are showing other potential thieves how they could be caught, if they ever decide to start thieving.
</Hypothetical real life situation>
D
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by RagnorakCan someone please explain how not putting cheaters on center stage equates with recognizing the problem? How does not putting cheaters on center stage equate to a refusal to deal with the problem? You mostly seem to be equating not publicizing engine use with ignoring engine use. i ask you to CAREFULLY read what was written and explain where I ever advocated ignoring the problem. Then again, I see more engines then the few who wish to make them receive more attention. Wouldn't it be less work (and less expensive) for Russ to ban you guys and leave the engines alone? I guess by Russ ignoring you that means he is refusing to recognize that you guys are creating a problem. That is a crock as is your example.
You're entitled to your opinion, fair enough.
<Hypothetical real life situation>... theft is illegal. You live in a city of 5000, where there are people committing theft on a daily basis. The law enforcers don't enforce the law, because they are afraid that if they admit there is a problem with theft in their city, then people will be afraid to move ...[text shortened]... ould be caught, if they ever decide to start thieving.
</Hypothetical real life situation>
D
Feivel
21 Nov 04
2 edits
Originally posted by FeivelThose who want to cheat will cheat anyway.I cant imagine a guy who is pretty honest and upright and sort of stuff becoming a cheater because he suddenly gets to know that a minority of the community cheat.And if a person shifted due to such a small reason he would have switched anyway.Anyway washing the dirty linen in public gaze should discourage a few wannabe cheaters.And the site Administraters taking action should stop the few who cheat in full public view and are proud to do it.
[b]But the first step in solving a problem is recognizing it is present.
It is recognized. Just not brought to such prominence that actually encourages some new cheaters to begin.
No use burying your heads in the sand and saying ...[text shortened]... heating such a high profile does encourage cheating.
Feivel[/b]
Edit. Havent seen the post above but fear of a player boycott should reduce potential engine use.Even in case the Administrators take no action, enough people read the forums to avoid playing the persons named.
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by druidraviAre you giving attention to cheaters by putting them in the spotlight?
Those who want to cheat will cheat anyway.I cant imagine a guy who is pretty honest and upright and sort of stuff becoming a cheater because he suddenly gets to know that a minority of the community cheat.And if a person shifted due to such a small reason he would have switched anyway.Anyway washing the dirty linen in public gaze should discourage a few w ...[text shortened]... straters taking action should stop the few who cheat in full public view and are proud to do it.
Feivel
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by FeivelIt is true that more attention given to the problem can ''show' to potential cheaters the way to cheat,but doing nothing about it is deeply wrong.
Can someone please explain how not putting cheaters on center stage equates with recognizing the problem? How does not putting cheaters on center stage equate to a refusal to deal with the problem? You mostly seem to be equating not publicizing engine use with ignoring engine use. i ask you to CAREFULLY read what was written and explain where I ever advocated ...[text shortened]... to recognize that you guys are creating a problem. That is a crock as is your example.
Feivel
You say:Wouldn't it be less work (and less expensive) for Russ to ban you guys and leave the engines alone? I guess by Russ ignoring you that means he is refusing to recognize that you guys are creating a problem.
If Russ would like to act in this way,he should also change the terms of service and write ''It's allowed to use chess software, chess computers or consult any third party to assist you in any game''
Is this fair enough?
Using of engines is forbidden and users have the full right to point it out, just like many users point out people insultiung them during a game or in forums.
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by RavelloIt (Russ banning people) was used as an example. I find it interesting that nobody wants to directly answer my question with a simple yes or no answer. By putting cheaters in the spotlight are we giving them attention?
It is true that more attention given to the problem can ''show' to potential cheaters the way to cheat,but doing nothing about it is deeply wrong.
You say:[b]Wouldn't it be less work (and less expensive) for Russ to ban you guys and leave the engines alone? I guess by Russ ignoring you that means he is refusing to recognize that you guys are creating ...[text shortened]... oint it out, just like many users point out people insultiung them during a game or in forums.
Feivel
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by RavelloThat is not answering the question. You are however implying that one type of attention is not what cheaters seek.
I can bet that being ''shamed'' in public is not the kind of ''attention'' that cheaters are seeking.
The more they are kept quiet,the more they can continue with their cheating.
Feivel
21 Nov 04
Do you really think that JW or Tlai were seeking this kind of attention? pleease.........
Yes,we're giving them attention but because they are a problem,not because they are brilliant chess players.
The ''attention'' given to them is very different than the ''attention'' given to a guy because he's damn good at chess,e.g.:Ironman31.
21 Nov 04
1 edit
Originally posted by RavelloNope...just the yes or no was enough. Your answer was yes (as it should be). Now my question is since cheaters are seeking attention (negative attention is still attention), why should we give it to them?
Do you really think that JW or Tlai were seeking this kind of attention? pleease.........
Yes,we're giving them attention but because they are a problem,not because they are brilliant chess players.
The ''attention'' given to them is ...[text shortened]... ' given to a guy because he's damn good at chess,e.g.:Ironman31.
Feivel
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by RavelloWell to be honest he already posted a thread to say stop publicly naming people for cheating, and since that's exactly what's happening in this thread, I imagine his stance may be to avoid the thread completely. 😉
It's funny how Russ posts in other threads in this forum but accurately avoids to say something in this thread..................:
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by Feivelyour question is pointless,since it has been said that they were not seeking this kind of attention.
Nope...just the yes or no was enough. Your answer was yes (as it should be). Now my question is since cheaters are seeking attention (negative attention is still attention), why should we give it to them?
Feivel
They wanted people to say ''OOooohh you've improved a lot,you play far better than a month ago!Great job!''
but people is saying ''How the hell in a month you went from 1129 to 1750?You should be using a chess program!''
But to answer your question ,I say that we should give them this kind of ''attention'' simply because this is not what they want,by giving them this ''negative attention'' we show the users' disappointment to them,and frankly this cannot be considered an incentive to cheat again and more ,especially for new users.
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by mrmistI think that was when people started comparing win/loss record to accuse others without any proof.But here you have the complete evidence short of a photograph to prove those people are cheating.
Well to be honest he already posted a thread to say stop publicly naming people for cheating, and since that's exactly what's happening in this thread, I imagine his stance may be to avoid the thread completely. 😉
21 Nov 04
Originally posted by RavelloWhere did I say they were not seeking attention? You seem to understand the mindset of a cheater. Why? A cheater is seeking attention...PERIOD. To a cheater there is no differnce qalitatively with attention. It is a quantative thing they seek. You either give them attention (as they want - POSITIVE or NEGATIVE) which is the same as giving in to a schoolyard bully or you ignore them and deal with the problem WITHOUT publicizing it.
your question is pointless,since it has been said that they were not seeking this kind of attention.
They wanted people to say ''OOooohh you've improved a lot,you play far better than a month ago!Great job!''
but people is saying ''How the hell in a month you went from 1129 to 1750?You should be using a chess program!''
But to answer your qu ...[text shortened]... rankly this cannot be considered an incentive to cheat again and more ,especially for new users.
Feivel