Author: odell hall
Date: 19:46:22 03/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 23, 1999 at 19:39:42, Micheal Cummings wrote: > >On March 23, 1999 at 19:01:04, odell hall wrote: > >> >>On March 23, 1999 at 17:38:42, James Robertson wrote: >> >>>On March 23, 1999 at 16:06:59, odell hall wrote: >>> >>>[snip] >>> >>>>I am not going to go around, and around about something so silly, you will have >>>>the last word on this. I will only say this, if someone doesn't want to be >>>>revealed as a cheater, then they should not cheat! That will eliminate all the >>>>bull. End of story >>> >>>[snip] >>> >>>With "End of story" it sounds like you are trying to get the last word in. :) >>> >>>James >> >> hahahahhaah funny, Yeah I was kind of worried how that sounded, but it was to >>late to change it. Anyway that is not my intention at all. I certainly did not >>bring this whole matter to this board to start a controversy. I brought the >>matter here in the first place, because of the confidence I have in this forum >>to detect computer cheats. I never expected a member here to defend the >>villians! > >Look, I have no problem with you posting games and asking whether or not this >person cheated. But you have no right to throw your accusation of this person >around in here when you are the only one as of yet to have found him guilty of >anything. > >If the Chess server he is on throws him out for cheating then yes you can come >on here and say this person has been banned from this server due to cheating. >Thus you would be only saying something which was already done. They have not >banned him, no one apart from you is calling him a cheater and if they are then >they have not told the appropriate people to take action. > >So really odell what I am saying is that you are not in any position to do >anything about it except to tell people who can do something about it, then when >the people with powers to punish this person say they have found him guilty, >then you can go and name him, because if it is wrong then the chess server would >be the one at fault for banning someone that did not cheat and they would be in >the wrong. > >You are not in any position to say one thing against this person, it is like if >you get ripped off in bussiness, until you take it to the appropriate people to >deal with this kind of thing and they find him quilty, you cannot go out and >call this person guilty, that is slander, you are calling an innocent man guilty >without him having his day in court. So you are in the wrong. > >The country where I am from you are innocent till proven guilty. I know there >are some countries where it is the other way around, but if you citizen of one >of them then I say you have to watch what you say in this forum because I would >suggest it is not the way things are done around here. > >You may be angry that you might have been cheated on, but you have no right to >make accusations. Even if you think you have proof, because apart from making >noise you have no right or power to punish him. The only thing you can to is >speak out, but then you might say something slanderous and it would be you that >would be in trouble. So in the end you would be the one that gets punished and >not him. Sorry Michael But unlike yourself I do not rely on a Server to make judgments and decisions for me, which my common sense finds to be obvious. You are giving ICC way to much power. You are saying that only ICC can say if a person is cheating or Not. This whole question can be resolved with some very basic logic, I don't need to be an adminstrator, to see that a person rated 752 cannot beat a 2500 rated computer. Nor does it require much thought , when one see's that a person's moves are matching 100% with a given computer program. I don't know about you, but this is enough to convince me of Cheating. You continue to say that I have not proved anything. Well if you believe that to be correct, then refute the evidence that I have given. You claim that I am the only way saying that this person is guilty. Obviously you have not read the post of Paul sores, and bruce moreland. To be frank I do not understand your motivation here, Certainly you can see for yourself that this person used a computer.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.