sanctions against cheaters

Originally posted by forevergreenwithenvy
er hang on, Books, well alot of those are opening books and they certainly DO tell you what move to make.

Databases, well there mostly collections of thousands of games, and yes they also can tell you what move to make, you ...[text shortened]... very strange, but hey this is the internet, lol

Regards FGWE

You don't know what you're talking about. It's not the "internet"; it's the standard rules for correspondence chess: books have been allowed since its inception. When you're playing correspondence chess on the internet it makes sense to allow use of databases which are, after all, merely compilations of prior played games. Now when you pull a game from a database or a line from a book you don't know if that move played in the game was the correct one or not; you have to use independent chess thinking to decide which line to use (usually from a wide range of choices).

Now people who plug in an engine to tell them what move to make are unlikely to play a different move from the one the engine suggests; if they thought they could play better than the engine why use it in the first place? Thus, they are using no independent chess judgment or analysis; they're just typists.

I hope that clears up the "book and databases" v. "engines" non-debate. Now as a former cheater , what do you think of an amnesty program for admitted cheaters like yourself?

Originally posted by no1marauder
I've said before that I don't have any personal issues here. YOU'RE the one trying to make it personal and refusing to answer my points. Why should someone who defends cheaters and supports those who oppose the Cheat Police concept be a member of the Game Mods, Arrakis?

PS I wish my wife would leave me!

Umm... I think the posts show something different guy. I think that anyone who has read your posts can verify that you can't stand it for anyone to say anything... BTW, one of your 'cronies' sent me a message with some inside info regarding why you are like you are. He didn't want to be identified... but he said in his message that 'even your own daughter testified against you'. So is this what you're all about dude? Yu are mad at the world? SHEESH!

Originally posted by arrakis
Pardon me dude, but anyone who reads the forums HAS to have seen this guy's absurd and ridiculous mad cravings to attack anyone and everyone who trys to post their ersonal opinons!

Damage to myself? HAH! no1 marauder has become his own ...[text shortened]... worst enemy... and he drags all who support him down with him.

At some point perhaps you'll desist from true personal attacks and discuss the points raised, but I doubt it. Unlike you, I've championed action against cheaters for months now, while you've supported them. 90% of the people who voted agreed with me that something needs to be done. Your "ersonal" opinions about me are beneath my contempt, but it would be ridiculous to have a supporter of cheaters and of critics of the game mods existence become a member of the Cheat Police.

EDIT: I just read your above post and apart from it being total nonsense, it shows quite clearly that you lack the emotional tools to be a dispassionate member of the Game Mods.

Originally posted by arrakis
Umm... I think the posts show something different guy. I think that anyone who has read your posts can verify that you can't stand it for anyone to say anything... BTW, one of your 'cronies' sent me a message with some inside info regarding why you are like you are. He didn't want to be identified... but he said in his message that 'even your own daught ...[text shortened]... ified against you'. So is this what you're all about dude? Yu are mad at the world? SHEESH!

I've defended you up till now.

But I don't understand... What has no1's family got to do with the subject of this thread?

If you think you are scoring points, you are mistaken. When you stoop this low, all you score are own-goals.

Disgraceful. 😠

Originally posted by arrakis
Umm... I think the posts show something different guy. I think that anyone who has read your posts can verify that you can't stand it for anyone to say anything... BTW, one of your 'cronies' sent me a message with some inside info regarding why you are like you are. He didn't want to be identified... but he said in his message that 'even your own daught ...[text shortened]... ified against you'. So is this what you're all about dude? Yu are mad at the world? SHEESH!

With this remark you are really going down the drain Arrakis. However skillful you might be at "policing", you obviously are not capable of stying objective in certain matters. Thats a very bad attitude when applying for a position in the CP, and I withdraw any support I had for you.

here is my view on ideal computer use and on database use etc (for what it is worth)

everything should be allowed ... provided it does not wreck the challenge between the players.

everything should be disallowed ... provided that it does not affect the player's freedom and learning and life.

engines and databases do affect both, but to different degrees.

engines wreck games between players massively ... but avoiding consulting an engine about your exact position does not limit your learning from that game.

opening-databases do only a little damage to player v player confrontation ... the strongerr player will usually win despite database use ... but stopping a player from freely using databases limits the players learning ... they are massively interested in the opening in progress .... opening databases - with explanations - should be encouraged.

now for my shocker ... i think the use of friends should be encouraged ... they will probably explain why they like the move ... the weaker player will learn a lot ... the game may be wrecked ... but this is a huge learning chance!

This is a most interesting thread. I would like to add a few comments. starting with the initial subject of the thread:

1. I think cheaters should be banned immediately. That includes "occassional" cheaters (if they exist).
2. I understand why books/databases are allowed. They are, because it was impossible to prove the use of them at the time of making the rules of correspondence chess. In principal, I don't think they should be allowed...
3. It's obvious, that engines is of much bigger help to a player than books/databases and therefor shouldn't be allowed. It makes no difference if the engine is accessible through some database program or not. What's important is, if it is used or not...
4. The game moderators should have a VERY strict set of rules to work with to ensure punishing only the guilty. I think it would be ideal to have focus groups to look at suspicious moves. Let me explain:
A player rated 1600 makes a good, but perhaps not easy to find, move (it actually happens 😀). The position is presented to 5 players rated round 1600. If 2 or more would find the move, this could not be counted as proof of cheating.
Focus groups will help the game moderators to avoid punishing people for playing well
5. Russ is of course the decision maker. No matter what the game moderators say or believe in. I have full confidence in Russ. He seems like a very sensible man.
6. I hope Russ will weight the peoples choices of game moderators very high, or at least reads this thread, because at least one poster in this thread has shown his inability of being a game moderator.

Originally posted by no1marauder
You don't know what you're talking about. It's not the "internet"; it's the standard rules for correspondence chess: books have been allowed since its inception. When you're playing correspondence chess on the internet it makes sense to allow use of databases which are, after all, merely compilations of prior played games. Now when you pul ...[text shortened]... a former cheater , what do you think of an amnesty program for admitted cheaters like yourself?

Those are not the standard rules.As far as I know,every official corr chess federation allows engine usage.Not that it matters,this is rhp,and here it's not allowed,but your claim is false.

There are more ways to use an engine than by just having it select moves and play the top (or 2nd) choice(reading the forums,it appears to me that most people have a very narrow view on cheating).Furthermore,be it database or engine,in either case you don't know if it's the best move.Computers still haven't solved chess,have they?Of course,it'll be a better move than anything most of us can come up with.

Originally posted by SirLoseALot
Those are not the standard rules.As far as I know,every official corr chess federation allows engine usage.Not that it matters,this is rhp,and here it's not allowed,but your claim is false.

There are more ways to use an engine than by just having it select moves and play the top (or 2nd) choice(reading the forums,it appears to me that most people hav ...[text shortened]... ved chess,have they?Of course,it'll be a better move than anything most of us can come up with.

No, your claim is false. This is from the Rules of the World Correspondence Chess Federation:

8. CONSULTATION:
a. Players are free to consult chess publications or literature, in printed or electronic form. Advise from another chess player is strictly forbidden.
b. The use of a chess engine (such as Chessmaster, Fritz, Rebel, etc.) or any other form of electronic consultation is strictly forbidden.

This is from the Rules of the International Email Chess Club:

7.1
Players are free to consult chess publications or literature in printed or electronic form. Any other form of assistance, either from another person or using chess engines within chess programs to make moves during the course of a game, is prohibited.

The FIDE recognized ICCF does not have rules in place that prohibit engine use, but why is that? Do you think it is because they sanction the use of engines? From what I've read (by John Knudsen, for instance), this is the case because the ICCF despairs of ever having procedures sufficient to determine who is using an engine. You can bet that if the ICCF had an effective way to determine who was using an engine, it would prohibit engine use.

Originally posted by bbarr
No, your claim is false. This is from the Rules of the World Correspondence Chess Federation:

8. CONSULTATION:
a. Players are free to consult chess publications or literature, in printed or electronic form. Advise from another chess player is strictly forbidden.
b. The use of a chess engine (such as Chessmaster, Fritz, Rebel, etc.) or any other form of ...[text shortened]... had an effective way to determine who was using an engine, it would prohibit engine use.

Did some research,you're quit right.I stand corrected.
That's what I get for believing others instead of doing my own research 😳

Originally posted by no1marauder
You don't know what you're talking about. It's not the "internet"; it's the standard rules for correspondence chess: books have been allowed since its inception. When you're playing correspondence chess on the internet it makes sense to allow use of databases which are, after all, merely compilations of prior played games. Now when you pul ...[text shortened]... a former cheater , what do you think of an amnesty program for admitted cheaters like yourself?

"You dont know what your talking about", you arrogant fool No1, the only reason referance to opening books and databases is allowed in corry chess is because it cant be stopped, its as simple as that, but it is still cheating, because it is outside assistance, the moves you or me find in an opening book, or after doing a search in a database are not yours or my moves, simply allowed because it cant be stopped.

If you want to stop cheating, and you want to sit there spouting rubbish about players using there own brains and playing there own moves No1, then you have to stop referance to books and databases as well as engines, its as simple as that, anything else is double standards, but then im getting used to that, it seems to be an RHP theme :-).

And while we are on the subject of cheating, i dont see any actions being taken against the people on RHP who create multiple accounts, infact i dont think any actions have been taken against those people, and there's plenty of them, and yet that is first on the list of the ToS, and then there is the small matter of those players who see fit to "throw" games as and when the mood takes them, for reasons best known to themselves.

"What do i think of an amnesty program for admitted cheaters ?", well let me explain something to you No1, a while ago a little friend of yours from FW asked me a question, and so i replied in a sensible and mature manner, what did i get in reply ?, nothing but verbal abuse, so No1 dont bother asking me any more questions ok, im sick and tired of listening to your pontificating, you and all the other FW boys should get the hell back to FW where you belong, how the hell you think you have the right to come in to RHP and tell people how to behave is beyond me, after the way you FW lot behave in that pathetic little forum of yours.

Amnesty for admitted cheaters, lol, what is that like a gun amnesty, you want me to go to my local police station and hand my engine in, lol,

No1 its up to Russ ok, not you, so stop your waffle.

Regards FGWE

Originally posted by forevergreenwithenvy
"You dont know what your talking about", you arrogant fool No1, the only reason referance to opening books and databases is allowed in corry chess is because it cant be stopped, its as simple as that, but it is still cheating ...[text shortened]... its up to Russ ok, not you, so stop your waffle.

Regards FGWE

Read BBarr's post for the rules of correspondence chess, idiot; it's just as physically impossible to stop engine use as it would be to ban the use of books and databases. There is a logical distinction that a guess a cheater wouldn't understand; the use of books has been a part of correspondence chess for hundreds of years. And it's laughable that an admitted cheater would tell me to get off the site.

probably the wrong place to bring this up ... but is there a right place?

people think a sudden rise in rating indicates computer-engine use ....
well ... everyone knows David Tebb is a genuine human chess magician.

yet for about 1 year tebb was around about 2120, then suddenly .... verrooom! 2300!!!!!!

i am not accusing tebbb.

i am saying ... when other players do this: it is not proof of anything ... worth a second look ... but it proves nothing.

Originally posted by flexmore
probably the wrong place to bring this up ... but is there a right place?

people think a sudden rise in rating indicates computer-engine use ....
well ... everyone knows David Tebb is a genuine human chess magician.

yet for about 1 year tebb was around about 2120, then suddenly .... verrooom! 2300!!!!!!

i am not accusing tebbb.

i am saying ... ...[text shortened]... players do this: it is not proof of anything ... worth a second look ... but it proves nothing.

Lol, about a year ago everyone on the site was below 2200 and a rating of about 2000 was sufficient to get into the top 20 (they now have to be 2150 or so). It's called inflation 😉

Dave

Originally posted by David Tebb
Lol, about a year ago everyone on the site was below 2200 and a rating of about 2000 was sufficient to get into the top 20 (they now have to be 2150 or so). It's called inflation 😉

Dave

Never heard of 'chess' inflation, economic - yes...prices, cost of living, etc., but ratings?