31 Dec 09
Originally posted by NowakowskiWhy pay money to subscribe to a site where blatantly obvious cheats are allowed to move to the top of the ratings lists with impunity? And where attempts to simply cite to their earliest games (which are of completely novice quality) are censored?
or perhaps these systems are in place to stop players from accusing non-cheaters.
Any idea of broadcasting unprofessional and biased evidence in a open source setting
is at best, ludicrous. Cheating is certainly a problem, and it certainly needs a
solution. The solution however, is not to allow random players to protest openly
against other play ...[text shortened]... ver, and over, and over again?
I think the system has been built with more in mind.
-GIN
31 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderOh,
Why pay money to subscribe to a site where blatantly obvious cheats are allowed to move to the top of the ratings lists with impunity? And where attempts to simply cite to their earliest games (which are of completely novice quality) are censored?
blatant cheats? - how many still exist? What evidence creates such certainty?
Citing evidence - Why must it be for all to see? If its indeed accurate, revocation of
there account should be sufficient, not public humiliation in all cases, accurate or not.
Impunity - English Tal? Sea Devil? .. the list of bans from the first page is rather long,
how many 1400's have been caught cheating?
1500s? How about non-tournament winners? It would seem only the opposite.
Players whom find there way to high ratings anoint themselves with a glorious target.
The fact is, this site has been weakened, and scarred more by the public accusations, and the unending witch hunt; than it ever has due any cheater.
31 Dec 09
1 edit
Originally posted by NowakowskiBaloney. The site has been scarred and discredited far more by the number of cheaters who have been allowed to continue to play on - in some cases for years - than by the accurate reporting of the evidence of their cheating by other players.
Oh,
blatant cheats? - how many still exist? What evidence creates such certainty?
Citing evidence - Why must it be for all to see? If its indeed accurate, revocation of
there account should be sufficient, not public humiliation in all cases, accurate or not.
Impunity - English Tal? Sea Devil? .. the list of bans from the first page is ra more by the public accusations, and the unending witch hunt; than it ever has due any cheater.
It is hypocritical to insist that no evidence be allowed to be presented and then to claim that no evidence exists because presentation of it has been censored.
31 Dec 09
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderIts silly to believe any method is completely accurate, and above error.
Baloney. The site has been scarred and discredited far more by the number of cheaters who have been allowed to continue to play on - in some cases for years - than by the accurate reporting of the evidence of their cheating by other players.
It is hypocritical to insist that no evidence be allowed to be presented and then to claim that no evidence exists because presentation of it has been censored.
Accurate reporting still exists, it need only be reported to a group of professionals, or at
least a group dedicated to the study of said issues.
Imagine a justice system where all you needed to do was publish your personal findings,
which would not be double checked, and then the town placed the suspect in jail.
Ridiculous.
Evidence of all actions exist, if players are indeed cheating, they should be punished.
Punishing them is simple, compile evidence, and give it to an authority whom may
turn the evidence into conviction.
Many strong players are willing to leave this site due to the witch hunts.. I know very
few whom have left due to cheating. I've heard complaints, I've seen clubs built
around known legitimacy. I've yet to see a group of players exclaim that there
is just to much cheating and they must go to some other site. 🙄
Cheaters may be vanquished without parading around and pointing fingers in the
hopes of finally hitting the right one.
Every site fights the same issues, for this site to remain a staple in the community,
the importance of fair and accurate consequences must be explored. Public accusation
is not fair, nor accurate. Every player deserves to play without any type of character
deframation. The system should be built to investigate, and remove cheaters without
absolving said comforts. Of course we have no "rights", but if said comforts disappear
the site is much more likely to be poisoned, than by the few cheaters who may slip
through the cracks.
31 Dec 09
Originally posted by chessisagameAre you saying Russ made this website for personal greed?
I agree with Number 1 and Now. There are points to both sides.
But, look at it this way, everytime they ban a cheater thats $29.99 coming out
of their pockets. Do you really think they really want to lose income?
If so, he should've made this site Member's only.
31 Dec 09
1 edit
The post that was quoted here has been removedplease EmLasker dude, that's the sort of thing that gets threads pulled,. Its much better to say something broad and general like, 'its only those who actually do cheat that have anything to fear', and in that way its not directed at anyone personally, but the point is still made. 🙂
31 Dec 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieHe didn't meen chess improvement...
please EmLasker dude, that's the sort of thing that gets threads pulled,. Its much better to say something broad and general like, 'only those who actually do cheat that have anything to fear', and in that way its not directed at anyone personally, but the point is still made. 🙂
He likes my figure.
31 Dec 09
Originally posted by EmLaskerTough to get members without being able to "try before you buy"
Are you saying Russ made this website for personal greed?
If so, he should've made this site Member's only.
Russ made this site based on his own dream, not ours.
I wouldn't call an online chess site with a $30 annual fee "Greedy"....
Silly...